This is a record of the proceedings in the Supreme Court bench hearings on the Constitutional validity of Aadhaar, which began on Feb 13, 2018. You may read the previous days' proceedings here: Day 1, Day 2, Day 3, Day 4, Day 5, Day 6, Day 7, Day 8, Day 9, Day 10, Day 11, Day 12, Day 13, Day 14, Day 15 and Day 16. Senior Advocate KV Viswanathan resumed arguments for Petitioners with his attack on Section 59 - the illegality of the purported validation provision. He read Delhi Cloth Mills case where it clearly held how a law can deem facts but cannot deem legal consequences. He presented the Indra Sawhney case (2000) being read where legislative declaration of legislative facts are amenable to judicial examination. In this case for example, Mr. Vishwanathan asserted, informed consent is a key compliance issue. Section 59 cannot declare compliance when it did not exist! Justice Chandrachud asked about the consequence of Section 59 being unlawful. Mr. Vishwanathan responds that all data collected between 2009 and 2016 ought to be destroyed, forthwith. Mr. Vishwanathan then moved to his next issue of the issue of defacto mandatoriness. He said the barter in the effective mandatoriness of Aadhaar is an unconstitutional condition. He referred to St. Xaviers and Olga Tellis cases. Mr. Vishwanathan distinguished between compulsion by State and non-State actors. Mr. Vishwanathan then argued about choice and bodily privacy and referenced a few European and South African cases. Justice Chandrachud commented on the interesting bit of information on Justice Sachs. Mr. Vishwanathan read an article ' The relational…
