A Guide to Litigating Identity Systems states of the country: “While Aadhaar coverage speed has been exemplary, with over a billion Aadhaar cards being distributed, some states report authentication failures: estimates include 49 percent failure rates for Jharkhand, 6 percent for Gujarat, 5 percent for Krishna District in Andhra Pradesh and 37 percent for Rajasthan.”173 c) The dissent of the Indian Supreme Court cites a report titled “Biometric Recognition: Challenges & Opportunities” by the National Academy of Science USA, which states that biometric recognition systems are inherently probabilistic because biometric characteristics can change as a result of various factors such as “changes in age, environment, disease, stress, occupational factors, training and prompting, intentional alterations, socio-cultural aspects of the situation in which the presentation occurs, changes in human interface with the system, and so on.”174 d) The Kenyan High Court acknowledges that a “lack of or poor biometric data, such as fingerprints” can lead to failures resulting in exclusion from the national identity system and its attendant services.175 This finding provided a partial basis for the High Court’s determination that a clear regulatory framework must be created in Kenya regulating the manner in which to enrol individuals with “poor biometrics” into the system.176 49. Biometric authentication failures have the potential to impact marginalised populations more often. a) The dissent of the Indian Supreme Court in the Aadhaar judgment cites excerpts from academic scholarship on the topic, including books that state the error rates in biometric systems are particularly high for the young, the aged, disabled persons, as well as persons suffering from 173 Government of India, Economic Survey 2016–17 at 194. 174 Joseph N. Pato and Lynette I. Millett, eds., Biometric Recognition: Challenges & Opportunities (National Academy of Science USA, 2010), https://www.nap.edu/read/12720/chapter/1 175 Huduma Namba Judgment, Nubian Rights Forum and Others v. The Hon. Attorney General, Consolidated Petitions No. 56, 58 & 59 of 2019 ¶ 1012 (2020). 176 Huduma Namba Judgment, ¶ 1012 (2020). 43