Missing the masses
On January 1, the Indian government announced roll out of its ambitious cash transfer scheme in 20 districts of the country based on unique identification (UID), also called Aadhaar. The media, while presenting the pros and cons of cash transfer, also mentioned that not all the beneficaries of various welfare schemes are enrolled under Aadhaar. However, in all its coverage of UID, most of the media seems to have forgotten the segment for which UID was actually meant.
“The UID project is really for the huge number of people who are outside the system. For the poor, this is a huge benefit because they have no identity, no birth certificates, degree certificates, driver’s licence, passport, no address,” Nandan Nilekani, the chairman of Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI), had said at starting of the project. However, media has largely ignored this segment to focus on those already covered by the social security net and now going to be the beneficaries of direct cash transfer.
Involving collection of biometric information of the residents, UID has been called the 'biggest social project on the planet' which lends identity to millions of those living on fringes of the society without a fixed adddress and hence denied any benefits. Homeless people, migrants and nomadic tribes form a chunk of this section. Nandan Nilekani had put the figure of people outside the system at 700 million. And he also had no plans to cover them.
Being called a 'number that walks with you', UID not only differs from other identity documents in its portability feature but also due to the 'introducer concept'. Introducers are the people authorised by the UID registrars (government departments and agencies) to introduce those without any residence or/and identity proof to submit. They include elected members, members of local administration bodies, postmen, influencers such as teachers and doctors, Anganwadi/ASHA workers and representative of local NGOs. However, most of those without a fixed address have no easy access to even these people who are supposed to enrol only those known to them.
Moreover, according to UIDAI's own admission, the 'introducer' concept has not been fully implemented in the country. “Most of the Registrars have been focussed on document-based enrolments,' says a report 'Social Inclusion and Aadhaar' released on April 30, 2012. For instance, only 10-15 per cent of the 45 million UIDs issued in Andhra Pradesh, one of the states with maximum UID enrolments, belong to people below poverty line. More of document-based enrolment will be recorded as various states and UTs make UID compulsory for availing services like driving licence, marriage registration, salary for government employees, pensions and scholarships besides claiming subsidies in food, cooking gas and housing. As is evident, most of these services are not availed or do not cover the identity-less.
The UIDAI report also praises Delhi's 'Mission Convergence' which has covered over 3,000 homeless till now with help of NGOs running night shelters. However, it's still a tall order considering there are between 56,000 to 1.6 lakh homeless in the city according to various estimates and not all of them can be contacted through NGOs.
UID as a concept is difficult to explain to anybody, leave alone the marginalised, as the number by itself does not confer any rights, not even citizenship. Unlike the UID number, the entitlements, like PDS, are not yet portable meaning a homeless migrant from Bihar given UID in Delhi can't lay claim to subsidised ration provided by the local government because he is still not acknowledged as its own. One of the concrete benefits is a zero balance bank account given to those enrolled in Delhi to help them secure their earnings. Though an extensive media coverage was given to 'Mission Convergence' when Delhi's Chief Minister Sheila Dikshit gave away the UID cards to homeless just before the Commonwealth Games in 2010, not much has been done in the name of follow ups.
The questioning from media is also needed because it has been building up the case for UID for the disadvantaged. In 'Nandan Nilekani’s new deal' published on September 22, 2010, HT's then editor-at-large Samar Halarnkar. says: “The need for Aadhar is undeniable and urgent...Proving identity is an insurmountable task for millions of Indians, particularly migrants, poor farmers and landless labour, who comprise most of the 400 million people who live below the global poverty line of $1.25 a day. These are people who often lose their history the moment they step out of their villages, cut adrift from the extensive social security schemes on which India will spend Rs. 1.18 lakh crore this year.”
M K Venu, the Managing Editor of 'The Financial Express', analysed the concept of liberty and state dependence in his write up, 'A unique liberal dilemma' published on September 24, 2010 “It must be clearly recognised that the emerging structure of India’s economy is an unique one where 45-50 per cent of those incrementally gaining employment are self-employed. These self-employed citizens are largely poor and are considerably mobile in seeking work. The UID programme will particularly cater to some of these emerging structural realities of India’s political economy,” he said.
A story 'Aadhaar offers hope for better jobs' published on June 3, 2010, The Mint, talked about how having a valid identity through UID can ensure better wages and working conditions to migrants who mostly rely on word-of-mouth and personal contacts to get a job “something that increases the risk of exploitation.”
In another article, 'A unique number for every Indian' published in Hindustan Times on December 30, 2010, Samar Halarnkar underscored the difficulties in covering this group: "To be truly revolutionary, the UID must work in real time, providing instant confirmation of identity to that tribal from Jharkhand who migrates to Delhi and the homeless man in Visakhapatnam who lives below a mango tree and so cannot register for a ration card.” However, now as UID goes forward with full momentum, the media seems to have forgotten this segment.
Some stories did touch upon the 'Introducer' concept but they focussed more on the secondary functionality aspect rather than the people. A story 'NGO's shelters shut after it pointed out UID flaws' published in Times of India on July 4, 2011, had views of one of the NGOs involved in UID process. The story focussed on how the NGO stopped conducting enrolments at its shelters because there was no clarity on its liability in case the information provided by homeless turns out to be false. This point was also raised in 'Enrolment saga', published in November 2011 issue of Frontline magazine. The write up by law and poverty expert, Usha Ramanathan, goes on to raise the issue of errors in data collection and the difficulty faced by NGOs in delivering Aadhaar cards to those enrolled because of moving nature of this community.
Deccan Herald also had a story 'Homeless people wait for months for their Aadhar cards' on January 12, 2013, which focussed on how delay in delivery of Aadhaar cards is leading to difficulties in locating some of those enrolled. In its story, 'Delhiites rush to get UID as govt makes it a must' published on January 3, 2012, Hindustan Times focussed on the rush at the enrolment centres after UID became compulsory for various government schemes in Delhi. It very briefly talks about a Jehangirpuri slum dweller, who was turned away for not having the requisite documents. The coverage was fairly inadequate as it did not mention if she had the documents but was not carrying them along or she was one of many who don't have any proofs.
To its credit, UID is the most ambitious India has ever seen. On paper, it is far more inclusive than other identity documents as it has multiple options to enroll 'unidentfied masses' and this should be celebrated. However, to monitor how well this provision is being implemented on the ground is also a job of the media which it can't afford to ignore.