Are Green ID Books Really the Problem? A Critical Look at South Africa’s Push for Digital IDs

South Africa’s government is urging a transition from green ID books to Smart IDs, claiming this will reduce fraud. Yet, articles like BusinessTech lack evidence, framing green IDs as obsolete and highly vulnerable without detailed proof. Are we seeing a legitimate push for modernization or a propaganda-driven shift to control personal data?

Are Green IDs Truly More Prone to Fraud?

Although the Department of Home Affairs calls green ID books insecure, no comparative data demonstrates that Smart IDs prevent fraud more effectively. Independent research, such as reports by the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), reveals digital systems create new vulnerabilities—centralized data invites more sophisticated cyber-attacks, and data breaches occur frequently. For example, Kenya’s Maisha Namba digital ID system, funded by the Gates Foundation, faced significant security breaches. This pattern suggests Smart IDs, rather than reducing risks, may simply shift the nature of identity crime.

Overlooking Surveillance and Privacy Concerns

The lack of transparency around data use raises questions about privacy. Privacy International and other watchdogs report that digital IDs increase mass surveillance possibilities. South Africa’s biometric requirements could facilitate state control, echoing surveillance trends in other countries, yet this point receives no coverage in official reports or in BusinessTech’s article. Global experiences show data centralization often leads to increased government oversight and reduced citizen autonomy, and the absence of acknowledgement suggests a one-sided narrative.

Financial Burden and Digital Exclusion

The cost of transitioning is another unaddressed issue. Many citizens lack digital access, especially in rural areas. A similar rollout in India with the Aadhaar system, also supported by Gates affiliates, disproportionately impacted low-income populations. This shift risks alienating South Africa’s most vulnerable citizens—an effect unmentioned in most Smart ID reports.

Propaganda or Progress?

The narrative behind South Africa’s Smart ID push lacks substantiated evidence. Claims of heightened security remain unproven, and the government’s framing of green IDs as outdated aligns with global trends to centralize data under the guise of modernization. As more countries adopt digital IDs, the true risks—mass surveillance, exclusion, and shifting crime—must be weighed against the limited evidence for increased security.