[Reader-list] Identity Crisis

[Taha Mehmood]

Dear all

Bibek Debroy's piece  pasted below cogently describes what ails
'identity' in India. He lists out three problems.

Selected excerpts-

First, there are geographical areas ostensibly illegal, such as urban
slums involving encroachment.

...The second nuance is linked to informal work. Large chunks of India
are in the informal workforce. Informality doesn't mean illegality.
But it often means lack of legal identity, since this work is
typically outside registration systems. Perhaps 450 million Indians
are in this category and the number will be more if those presently
outside the workforce (such as women) begin to enter, as female work
participation rates rise. If not linked to place of residence,
identity-proof is sometimes linked to place of work and we thus have a
problem. Elsewhere, transitions from self-employment to
wage-employment and rural to urban facilitated legal recognition
through work-place. Developing countries with national identity
systems have smaller populations. Or, to take the Chinese example,
communism built in household registration systems....

...The third nuance of legal identity is individual-based and given
the above, becomes difficult to establish. This isn't a problem that
plagues India alone. It is a problem that characterises much of South
Asia and sub-Saharan Africa and some segments of Latin America and
East Asia too....

Debroy lists other dimensions of identity quagmire- excerpts-

First, there are multiple identity cards for different purposes and a
card acceptable for one purpose is not accepted for another.

Second, there is rampant bribery and corruption in issuing cards....

Third, counterfeit cards float around and those who are meant to check
them for authenticity are negligent or lack necessary means.

I think this instance again brings to forefront questions that we have
been trying to think through on the reader-list.

a) What is identity?
b) Is the transfer of such a huge amount of money for MNIC just?
c) How do we ensure that even if MNIC is delivered then the identity
problem will be solved?

Regards

Taha








http://www.indianexpress.com/news/identity-crises/419283/0
Bibek Debroy Posted: Feb 05, 2009 at 2321 hrs IST

Identity crises

When travelling abroad, one is used to hotels, offices and assorted
other places asking for identification proof. That's true not only of
developed countries, but developing ones too — 9/11 reinforced the
trend. Until 26/11, that was rarely the case in India. Every Indian's
aspiration is of becoming a VIP, whatever that expression means.
Consequently, self-proclaimed VIPs resent the idea of being asked who
they are. The world is supposed to know who they are. Post 26/11, this
has changed and there is greater insistence and acceptance of
identity-proof. For those with access to passports, driving licences
and PAN cards, there is no problem.

However, for the majority of Indians, especially those living in
Bharat, there is a problem in establishing who you are, unless you
possess voter cards and/or ration cards. There are three different
nuances of the legal identity problem. First, there are geographical
areas ostensibly illegal, such as urban slums

involving encroachment. With Slumdog Millionaire in the news, Dharavi
is one obvious instance.

"So they live in illegal houses and use illegal electricity, drinking
illegal water and watch illegal cable TV. They work in Dharavi's
numerous illegal factories and illegal shops." That's a quote from
Vikas Swarup's Q&A. Many proofs of identity are linked to place of
residence. If residence is illegal, how does one establish legal
identity?

The second nuance is linked to informal work. Large chunks of India
are in the informal workforce. Informality doesn't mean illegality.
But it often means lack of legal identity, since this work is
typically outside registration systems. Perhaps 450 million Indians
are in this category and the number will be more if those presently
outside the workforce (such as women) begin to enter, as female work
participation rates rise. If not linked to place of residence,
identity-proof is sometimes linked to place of work and we thus have a
problem. Elsewhere, transitions from self-employment to
wage-employment and rural to urban facilitated legal recognition
through work-place. Developing countries with national identity
systems have smaller populations. Or, to take the Chinese example,
communism built in household registration systems.

The third nuance of legal identity is individual-based and given the
above, becomes difficult to establish. This isn't a problem that
plagues India alone. It is a problem that characterises much of South
Asia and sub-Saharan Africa and some segments of Latin America and
East Asia too. There are several dimensions to the Indian problem.
First, there are multiple identity cards for different purposes and a
card acceptable for one purpose is not accepted for another. Second,
there is rampant bribery and corruption in issuing cards. People who
are entitled to them don't get them and those who shouldn't get them
do, illegally. This has been documented ad nauseam for driving
licences, BPL cards and Antyodaya, with the CAG having castigated
several states. Third, counterfeit cards float around and those who
are meant to check them for authenticity are negligent or lack
necessary means. Identity cards don't only establish identity. They
are also required for subsidised access to public services and
positive discrimination, such as caste certificates. We should
probably have solved the problem in the '60s, when Central and
Centrally-sponsored schemes proliferated.

But we didn't solve it then and wouldn't have bothered even now, had
it not been for 26/11. Prior to that there was a multi-purpose
national identity card (MNIC) pushed by the NDA in 2002, with the
stated objective of curbing illegal migration from across the border,
especially Bangladesh. It was ostensibly tried out in border districts
in pilot mode, with Delhi, Andhra Pradesh, Tamil Nadu, Goa and
Puducherry thrown in. However, despite pilots being over by 2008, the
UPA didn't seem very serious about MNIC, perhaps because electoral
politics in some states encouraged issuance of electoral cards to
those who weren't Indians. 26/11 changed this and there have been
Government statements that after the 2011 Census, every Indian will
have an MNIC, probably by 2015. The database will therefore be
Census-driven. Does that automatically ensure every MNIC is genuine?
And despite the euphoria about biometry, will agencies possess
authentication technology? Will MNIC also be used to target public
services and positive discrimination?

There is possibly some utility in splicing NREGA and Sarva Shiksha
Abhiyan (SSA) into the Census database. The advantage of the former is
that there is an explicit provision of mandatory social audits by Gram
Sabha to check veracity. In most states, Gram Sabha audits haven't
worked well. However, NREGA also incorporates provisions on right to
information, public disclosure and third-party audits. These have
worked much better —what better evidence than murder of NREGA
activists in Jharkhand?

As of now, NREGA only covers households self-identified as poor. But
with that as base data, one should be able to create a database of
adults in rural India, at least those in working-age groups.
Similarly, school enrolment has shot up dramatically, though that
doesn't mean we have solved the problem of drop-outs and inadequate
retention. Largely because of mid-day meals, and not core SSA, there
are probably only around five million children who are never enrolled
in primary school, mostly children of migrants. Stated differently,
why don't the poor opt for existing I-card systems? Apart from the
lack of information, each existing I-card is issued by a monopoly
state provider, engendering corruption and high transaction costs.
Offering choice and multiple channels helps eliminate monopoly and
reduce corruption. In a way, NREGA offered choice by roping in
panchayats and third-party audits, and civil society also helped curb
excesses and discretion associated with monopoly. There is thus a
check on the Census database. More importantly, if the splicing isn't
done, home ministry-driven MNIC will only be used for establishing
identity and will primarily be for security.

That's an important step. But we still won't have a single identity
card, and identity requirements for subsidised public delivery of
services and positive discrimination will remain. That shouldn't be
the end-goal. Let's not forget that, contrary to what the
Administrative Reforms Commission recommended in its second report,
NREGA payments are compulsorily made through bank and post office
savings accounts, not in cash. If there are multiple good ideas, let's
marry them.

The writer is a Delhi-based economist xpress at expressindia.com