Anti-terrorism laws do not necessarily deter terror crimes but do lend themselves to gross misuse. Discuss the above statement in the light of Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act [UAPA]. (200 words)
Refer – The Hindu
Enrich the answer from other sources, if the question demands
IAS Parliament 6 years
KEY POINTS
Provisions under UAPA
· UAPA gives vast discretionary powers to state agencies, rendering personal liberty at risk, and curtailing judicial oversight.
· As long as the government version (charge sheet) makes a case for an offence under UAPA, the court can’t grant bail.
· Many constitution makers saw such detentions as a big risk, but the clause was retained with the condition that its use would be rare.
· Considering the inordinately slow pace of criminal trials in India, UAPA is effectively a warrant for perpetual imprisonment without trial.
· Fallouts – There have already been multiple cases where people have spent multiple years in jail, only to get acquitted at the end.
· Such detentions are hence a blatant assault on personal liberty, for which no amount of compensation can possibly be made.
UAPA prone to misuse
· The UAPA authorises the government to ban “unlawful organisations” (subject to judicial review) and penalises membership of such organisations.
· But “unlawful activities” is widely and vaguely defined, and encompasses terms like causing “disaffection” against India.
· Even membership of an unlawful organisation (which is a criminal offence that could entail even life imprisonment), is not defined broadly.
· Notably, charge-sheets under UAPA often cite ‘seizure of books of banned organisations’ and ‘having met active members’ as proof for membership.
· Reform - In 2011, the Supreme Court did make an attempted to narrow the scope of these provisions, in order to minimise misuse.
· It held that “membership” was limited to cases where an individual is found to have engaged in active incitement of violence.
· But the implementation of these provisions has nonetheless been patchy and arbitrary and governments continue to have unbridled power to arrest.
Way Ahead
· People occupying high government offices are also human, and hence, despite the best intentions of legislations, misuse is inevitable.
· The best possible solution is one that minimises misuse, which can be done by reducing the discretionary powers of authorities.
· Another important aspect to improve the justice system in India is to speed up cases to avoid years of litigation, particularly when bail is not an option.
Shankaranand 6 years
Please Review
Thank You.
IAS Parliament 6 years
Second part of the question was answered well. First part should also need to be answered by discussing the failures of anti terror laws in deterring terror crimes by quoting some examples such as TADA, POTA, and UAPA Act. Keep Writing.
