A Guide to Litigating Identity Systems THE RIGHT TO LIVE IN DIGNITY 63. Identity systems violate the dignity of individuals. a) The dissent of the Indian Supreme Court in the Aadhaar judgement holds that the arbitrary exclusion of individuals from benefits and subsidies to which they are entitled is a violation of dignity.267 b) The dissent of the Indian Supreme Court in the Aadhaar judgement holds that because social security schemes were introduced to protect the dignity of the marginalised, exclusion from these schemes as a result of Aadhaar violates the dignity of the individual.268 c) The dissent of the Indian Supreme Court in the Aadhaar judgement holds that while efficiency is a significant facet of institutional governance, it cannot be a justification to compromise dignity.269 d) The Jamaican Supreme Court holds that the right to privacy recognises that a person’s biometric information is theirs and that they retain control over that information by virtue of their inherent dignity as free autonomous beings.270 e) The Jamaican Supreme Court holds that the inherent dignity of all human beings includes the right of the individual “to be left alone, the right to be anonymous and to retain control over their home, body, mind, heart and soul.”271 267 Aadhaar Judgment, Justice K.S. Puttaswamy and Another v. Union of India and Others, Writ Petition (Civil) No. 494 of 2012 & connected matters, ¶ 262 of dissent (2018). 268 Aadhaar Judgment, ¶ 253 of dissent. 269 Aadhaar Judgment, ¶ 13 of dissent. 270 Julian J. Robinson v. The Attorney General of Jamaica, Claim No. 2018HCV01788, ¶247(B)(10) (2019). 271 Julian J. Robinson, ¶ 247(B)(11). 62