first_imgCalling the passage of the bill in this manner “a veryCalling the passage of the bill in this manner “a very dangerous trend”, Ramesh had said that the government tried to “bypass” Rajya Sabha by doing this.Insisting that a series of conditions are specified in Article 110 and that Article 110 uses the word “only” if those conditions are prevalent can a bill be declared a money bill, he had said that the Aadhaar bill, which was passed as a money bill “ignored five recommendations made by the Rajya Sabha.”It had many other provisions and most constitutional experts have given the view that the Aadhaar bill is not a money bill. While the prerogative of declaring a bill as a money bill or not is that of the Speaker and the Speakers decision is final but the recommendation to the Speaker to consider making it a money bill is that of the government.”It is the government that decides whether it is a money bill or not and the Speaker only certifies it as money bill,” Ramesh had said.Moving amendments in the Upper House during consideration of the bill, the former Union Minister had argued that every individual should have the freedom to opt out of Aadhaar and said the present bill does not give that space.Stating that he himself does not have an Aadhaar card, Ramesh had said a situation may arise when it may be needed even to book a flight or get a phone number.advertisementHe had also opposed another provision in the bill which he termed as “broad” and “amorphous” and could become the ground for misuse of the law as it gives “sweeping powers” on the grounds of national security.He had suggested that rather than national security, the terms “public emergency” or “public safety” could be used. He had said that an independent member like the CVC should be included in the panel that decides which information regarding a person can be shared.Ramesh had said any suo motu powers, “even to collect information” should not be given to the Aadhaar authority, for instance it could even direct collection of DNA.He had said there were concerns of privacy and the amendments moved by him were in line with the recommendation suggested by a commission headed by Justice (retd) A P Shah, which had been set by the Planning Commission to examine the matter. PTI SJK MNL RKS AG SClast_img read more