A Guide to Litigating Identity Systems INTRODUCTION 5. The systems that states put in place to identify citizens and non-citizens bring with them great risks. This is particularly the case when they involve biometrics – the physical characteristics of a person, like fingerprints, iris scans, and facial photographs. While many countries in the world have existing ID cards, of varying types and prevalence, there has been a new wave in recent years of state “digital identity” initiatives. Most famous and largest of these is India’s Aadhaar scheme, with over 1.2 billion people enrolled, their biometrics stored, and a unique 12-digit number issued, which is used for everything from receiving government benefits to opening a bank account. 6. However, these systems come with risks. There is a risk of exclusion, particularly for groups who have a history of being excluded or denied rights or citizenship. With digital identities being used more broadly, from accessing government subsidies through to education and health, the impact of exclusion is often worsened by these systems. Similarly, they create danger of exploitation by the state or the private sector by linking all stored data about a person back to a single number. The possibilities for surveillance, based on this 360-degree view of the person, are chilling. 7. Despite these dangers, affected individuals and communities are rarely consulted prior to these systems being introduced. Often identification systems are pushed through by decree, diktat, or means that allow less democratic accountability, denying the systems a democratic mandate and often a legal basis under the rule of law. The absence of such an inclusive, transparent legislative process means that there is no space to review, assess, and amend proposals before implementation. For something as intrinsically personal as identity, and with identity systems so open to potential abuse, the lack of democratic debate and accountability is concerning. 6