A Guide to Litigating Identity Systems b) The Judicial Yuan in Taiwan argued that compulsory fingerprinting was unnecessary for the identity card system the government sought to introduce in Taiwan.183 In particular, the Judicial Yuan identified existing anti-fraud components, other than fingerprints, of identity cards that are designed to prevent fraud.184 Intrusive nature 51. The use of biometric data in identity systems is uniquely problematic because of the data’s physical nature. The data’s unique status as a part of a person’s body, as in the case of fingerprints and iris scans, raises concerns of sensitivity and control of one’s own body. a) The Mauritian court relies on the physical nature of fingerprint data in finding how the country’s limited search-specific right to privacy was implicated.185 The fingerprinting requirement was evaluated as a physical search of the person, which allowed the court to examine the constitutionality of the fingerprinting requirement even where there was not a generally protected right to privacy in that country.186 In Mauritius, the constitutional right to be free from unlawful search and seizure requires that a search only be permitted in the interests of public order, except when that search is shown to be reasonably unjustifiable in a democratic society.187 b) The dissenting opinion in the Aadhaar judgment notes the threat to bodily privacy posed by biometric data.188 The dissent notes that the collection 183 Judicial Yuan Interpretation No. 603, Taiwan, Holding (2005). 184 Judicial Yuan Interpretation No. 603, Taiwan, Holding (2005). 185 Madhewoo, 2015 SCJ 177 at 23. 186 Madhewoo, 2015 SCJ 177 at 23. 187 Madhewoo, 2015 SCJ 177 at 24. 188 Aadhaar Judgment, ¶ 125–26 of dissent. 45