The questionnaire for the population enumeration phase of Census 2027 has triggered a political controversy, with the Congress alleging that the inclusion of detailed questions about respondents and their parents could facilitate surveillance and serve a “deeper nefarious purpose”. The Left has raised similar concerns.The controversy follows an August 15 report in The Indian Express that several new or modified questions in the Census questionnaire were also part of the National Population Register (NPR) schedule notified in 2020, when the NPR had become contentious amid protests over the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) and fears of a nationwide National Register of Citizens (NRC).The population enumeration questionnaire has 40 questions, 14 of them new or modified compared with the 2011 Census. These cover spouse’s name, nationality as declared, father’s and mother’s particulars, Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe/caste, literacy and digital literacy, highest educational qualification and stream, place of Covid-19 vaccination, number of bank accounts, mobile number, Aadhaar, voter ID, passport and driving licence.Eight of these — nationality as declared, father’s and mother’s particulars, mobile number, Aadhaar, voter ID, passport and driving licence — were also included in the NPR schedule prepared for the 2020 exercise.Also read | Only 9 disability categories in Census 2027 form, rights groups want all 21The parental questions are particularly significant. The 2020 NPR schedule sought the date and place of birth of a person’s father and mother, including the district and State and, if they were born outside India, the country. These questions had been at the centre of the political opposition to NPR.Why is that controversial?There are two distinct concerns: privacy and the political context in which the NPR was revived.On privacy, the argument is that Census data has traditionally been collected for population statistics and planning, while the new questionnaire seeks a much wider range of personal information, including details that can identify or link individuals to other government databases. The question is therefore not simply how much data the government collects, but how it is stored, protected and used.Story continues below this adThe second concern relates to citizenship. The NPR is a register of the country’s “usual residents”, not a citizenship register. A usual resident is someone who has lived in a local area for at least six months or intends to stay there for the next six months; this can include a foreigner meeting the residence criterion.The NPR is, however, linked in law to the process for preparing the National Register of Indian Citizens. The Citizenship (Registration of Citizens and Issue of National Identity Cards) Rules, 2003, provide for preparation of a Population Register and its verification for preparation of the citizens’ register. The rules also provide for individuals whose citizenship is considered doubtful to be marked for further inquiry. In 2019-20, Union Home Minister Amit Shah repeatedly spoke of a nationwide National Register of Citizens. Photo: ANIThis legal connection became politically explosive in 2019-20. The NPR was being revived soon after the CAA was passed and against the backdrop of the NRC in Assam, which had excluded around 19 lakh people. At the same time, Union Home Minister Amit Shah repeatedly spoke of a nationwide NRC and asked people to understand the “chronology” in which the CAA would be followed by the NRC.NPR itself was not new. It had first been prepared in 2010 along with the houselisting phase of the 2011 Census and was updated through a door-to-door exercise in 2015.Story continues below this adIt was this political context that fundamentally changed how the exercise was perceived. An exercise that had previously been conducted without comparable controversy became associated with the possibility of citizenship being questioned.What did the government say in 2020?The government sought to reassure people that the controversial questions on parents’ date and place of birth were optional.Then Information and Broadcasting Minister Prakash Javadekar said that if a person remembered the date and place of birth of his or her parents, the information could be provided; if not, the columns could be left blank.Then Union Minister Ram Vilas Paswan said that nobody could lose citizenship merely because they did not know their parents’ date or place of birth, and that no documentary proof would be required for such information.Story continues below this adAlso in Explained | How India plans to count caste this time — and what went wrong earlierThe government also maintained that NPR was primarily a database of residents intended to improve policy formulation and delivery of welfare schemes. Shah argued that knowing the demographic composition of an area would help governments plan services and identify beneficiaries.There was, however, a contradiction that contributed to the mistrust. In December 2019, Shah said NPR data would never be used for an NRC and that the two exercises were governed by different laws. But earlier government statements in Parliament and the Citizenship Rules themselves had explicitly linked the Population Register to preparation of the citizens’ register.Why does the government need so much data?There is a legitimate administrative rationale for collecting detailed demographic data.The government has argued that a comprehensive database of residents can help it formulate policies, plan public services, identify beneficiaries, and improve national security. Information drawn from different government databases can also help reduce duplication and discrepancies in records and cut paperwork for citizens.Story continues below this adThe NPR was also envisaged as a way of bringing together basic demographic information with details such as mobile numbers and identity documents. Officials argued that this could make government services more efficient.NewsletterFollow our daily newsletter so you never miss anything important. On Wednesday, we answer readers' questions.SubscribeThese are not inherently unreasonable objectives. Nor are NPR and NRC, as exercises in themselves, necessarily “nefarious”. India has conducted the NPR before, without the political controversy that surrounded its proposed 2020 update.The problem was that the government revived the NPR at a moment when public trust over citizenship had already been badly damaged — by the CAA, the NRC in Assam, repeated statements about a nationwide NRC, and the political messaging around “aap chronology samajhiye” (understand the chronology). The assurances that followed did not fully restore that trust, particularly because earlier official statements had explicitly described the NPR as the first step towards, or basis for, an NRC.That history explains why questions that might otherwise appear to be routine demographic data collection — particularly nationality and detailed information about one’s parents — are again being viewed through the prism of citizenship and surveillance.