In an organizational structure, it is understood that two
separate channels of communication exist. One is the formal channel of
communication which follows the line of hierarchy of the organization. Second
is the informal channel, in the popular parlance, termed as ‘grapevine’. As the
name suggests, the formal channel is the established, legitimate and verifiable
channel of communication. However, communications still mostly happen through
the informal channel, and though not having the formal backing of the
organizational structure, such communication is more relied upon, sought after
and followed.
The above analogy holds good for the way the process of
Aadhaar implementation has unfolded in India. As far as formal communication
goes, Aadhaar has always been portrayed as being ‘voluntary’ in nature.
However, the government has left no stone unturned in mandating its use if one
wants to interact with the government using any existing interface of
communication between itself, or even the private service providers, and the
people. So while the apex court of the country is yet to decide on the legitimacy
of government’s actions that have intended to make Aadhaar mandatory for
availing of entitlements, the government has yet again conceptualized the new
National Health Protection Scheme revolving around Aadhaar as the primary
document to be relied upon in order to identify beneficiaries. Whereas
provisions have been made for the use of other documents if Aadhaar is not
available, however it is also provided that a time limit will be advised to the
patient for registering with Aadhaar, and treatment without Aadhaar will be
given only for the first time.
We have already been a witness to a number of policy induced
deaths, wherein people have died of starvation as they have been refused their
entitled ration in absence of valid Aadhaar number. This is despite the
maintenance of the recurrent narrative by the government and the courts alike
that Aadhaar cannot be made mandatory, especially for identifying beneficiaries
in case of entitlements.
Herein comes the crucial role of ‘grapevine’. Despite
mandating of Aadhaar being illegal, the government and its agencies have
created such a strong informal communication channel that it has been made
practically impossible to avoid Aadhaar registration. For instance, recently I
shifted into a new rented accommodation. I was very casually informed that the
system itself would not allow registration of the rent agreement if I did-not
provide my Aadhaar number. Similarly, I was being heavily pressurized by my
telecom operator, a private company, that it was mandatory for me to provide my
Aadhaar details if I wanted my services to continue. In such cases it becomes
irrelevant to argue on the legality of such actions as firstly, there is no
hearing given to you and not even the slightest amount of energy is invested by
the counterparty in understanding the facts of the situation. In the present
times, no-one wants to be seen being on the wrong side of the government.
Secondly, even if you maintain your stand steadfastly, then you would have to
be ready to either forget about availing of the service in question or be ready
to fight long court battles, which is not a very viable option for many. Much
worse, however, is the condition of those whose daily existence depends on
their entitlements. The state has proven that it does-not shed even a false
tear for those who are losing their lives even in the process of having to
prove their legitimacy as Indian citizens.
It is amply clear that even court directions and legalities
are not a concern when the executive decides to have its way. There are
numerous ways and means through which the intended actions are carried out,
while at the same time paying lip-service when it comes to obeying the law, and
hoodwinking it in the process. The implementation of Aadhaar has been a case in
point, where, despite contrary court directions, reports of misuse, security
threats, even deaths of common people, the government has continued on its
mission to make its use universal and mandatory. The new National Health
Protection Scheme, in spirit, follows the same trajectory.
No comments:
Post a Comment