THE RESEARCH SHADOW
Scoring a country on virtue is the exact move the theory in this piece teaches you to distrust, so this is not that. It is a process-legitimacy comparison. Each system is scored only on checkable process facts across the three axes that mirror the acts. The scale runs one way: higher is more ratification-grade process, lower is less. The thesis predicts that constitutional-grade systems would carry ratification-like process. The honest finding is that they mostly do not, and that one of the rows complicates the thesis in a way worth keeping.
These define who you are, so the three axes apply with full force. This is where ratification-grade process is owed, and mostly absent.
A transfer protocol does not define who you are, alternatives survive, and non-participation stays legal. Two of the three axes do not even apply. The constitutional charge here is near zero, which is why the prescription is layered, not uniform.
Estonia scores high where Aadhaar scores low: its identity law and its data-exchange backbone were in place before the ID card rolled out, the inverse of the build-first order. That is the thesis cutting against itself in the useful direction. It shows the missing legitimacy is not a law of nature but a choice, and that a constitutional-grade identity layer is buildable when the process comes first.
Held out for now: the EU digital identity wallet, which is in flux and has a thin documented process trail. It is a live experiment to watch, not a scored row.