NIDS dogma makes no sense
THE EDITOR, Sir:
It seems that the Government and some of those who support the introduction of the National Identification System (NIDS) are saying that the only way that a citizen can satisfactorily prove his identity as that particular person is by his possession and production of this national identity card. I find that position to be untrue, unfounded, illogical and absurd, and fundamentally flawed.
Surely, if a citizen is in possession of a valid driver's licence, a passport, and/or an ID card issued by the Electoral Office, and has the oral and/or documented declaration or testimony of persons who know that he is that whom he asserts himself to be, it must be reasonable to accept that evidence as sufficient identification, in the absence of other evidence to the contrary or a reasonably held suspicion that the evidence produced is inaccurate and in need of verification.
In that situation, why insist on the production of this new national ID card for what will essentially be survival of the citizen?
With the passage of time, as scores and hundreds and thousands of citizens lose their cards that must be replaced at their expense, think of the further inconveniences and hardships that our new god (Government) would have placed on the backs of citizens.
The truth and the fact is, there are different ways of proving identity. This NIDS legislation denies this truth, as its proponents and its provisions seem to insist that the national ID card is the only way. If that is made law, justice and truth will not be ours in this situation. This bill must be revamped.
MAURICE C. SAUNDERS