NEW UAPA ACT 1967
The UAPA(an Unlawful Activities Prevention Act) is an upgrade of the TADA(Prevention)Act, which was allowed to lapse in 1995 and the POTA act which was repealed in 2004. The UAPA act was orginally passed in 1967 under the then Prime minister Indira gandhi.Eventually amendments were brought under the successive governemnts in 2004, 2008 and 2013.
Considering the threats for nations integrity and soverignity the present amendment to the UAPA Act was brought. The outcome of the UAPA act 1967 reflects some exemples which secured the nations soverignity.
In exercise of the powers vested in the central government under section 3 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention)Act,1967, the Government has declared following organizations as unlawful associated during the last few years
1. Islamic Research Foundation (RIF)
2. National Liberation Fornt in Tripura(NLFT)
Under the section 35 of UAPA, the Governemnt on being satisfied that the organization is involved in terrorism had added the following organizations to the first schedule of UAPA during the last three years:
1. Al-Qaida in Indian Sub-continent(AQIS) and all its manifestations.
2. Islamic State in Khorasan Province (ISKP)/ISIS-K and all its manifestations.
3. Khalistan Liberation Force and all its manifestations.
The new UAPA Bill,2019 gives more power to the central institutions for functioning and curbing the terrorism from its roots. The following are highlights of the new UAPA bill,2019
1. Who may commit terrorism: Under the Act, the central government may designate an organisation as terrorist organisation if it 1) commits or participates in acts of terrorism, 2) prepares for terrorism 3)promotes terrorsim or 4)invloved in terrorism. The bill additionally empowers the government to designate individuals as terrorists on the same grounds.
2. Approval for seizure of propert by NIA: If the investigation is conducted by an officer of the NIA, the approval of the Director General of NIA would be required for seizure of properties that my be connected with terrorism.
3. Investigation by NIA: The bill additionally empowers the officers of NIA, of the rank of inspector or above, to investigate cases.
4. Insertion to schedule of treaties: The Act defines terrorist acts to include acts committed winthin the scope of any of the treaties listed in a schedule to the Act. The schedule lists 9 trieties, including the Convention for the suppression of Terrorist Bombings(1997), and the Convention against Taking of Hostages(1979). The Bill also adds another treaty to the list.That is Inernational Convention for suppression of Acts of Nuclear Terrorism(2005) .
Even though the bill act as deterance to all unlawful practices of terrorist,it also inhibits some provisions which are not plausible
Because of these unreasonable provisions the Human rights organisations/activists opposing the bill due to following apprehensions
1. It empowers officials to brand any person "a terrorist", without following due process.
2. It does not provide any legal consequence in case an individual is designated as terrorist.
3. The only statutory remedy available to such a person is to make an application before the central government for de-notification, which will be considered by a Review committte constituted by the government itself.
4. An official designation as terrorist will be akin to 'civil death' for a person, with social boycott, expulsion form job, hounding by media and perhaps attack from self proclaimed vigilante groups.
5. The law could target minorities or section of people thereby affecting their cultural rights. In digital connected world the facts and fictions are all mixed up. The fact checking of news through social media is less prevalent.
The concerns of the vast pool of human activists need to be noted and should accomodate the necessary checks and balance before enforcing the law. This does not mean the threats and security of the nation is less important. For any nation to be prosperous and well governed, security need to be robust and well functioned with minimum errors.
Considering the threats for nations integrity and soverignity the present amendment to the UAPA Act was brought. The outcome of the UAPA act 1967 reflects some exemples which secured the nations soverignity.
In exercise of the powers vested in the central government under section 3 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention)Act,1967, the Government has declared following organizations as unlawful associated during the last few years
1. Islamic Research Foundation (RIF)
2. National Liberation Fornt in Tripura(NLFT)
Under the section 35 of UAPA, the Governemnt on being satisfied that the organization is involved in terrorism had added the following organizations to the first schedule of UAPA during the last three years:
1. Al-Qaida in Indian Sub-continent(AQIS) and all its manifestations.
2. Islamic State in Khorasan Province (ISKP)/ISIS-K and all its manifestations.
3. Khalistan Liberation Force and all its manifestations.
The new UAPA Bill,2019 gives more power to the central institutions for functioning and curbing the terrorism from its roots. The following are highlights of the new UAPA bill,2019
1. Who may commit terrorism: Under the Act, the central government may designate an organisation as terrorist organisation if it 1) commits or participates in acts of terrorism, 2) prepares for terrorism 3)promotes terrorsim or 4)invloved in terrorism. The bill additionally empowers the government to designate individuals as terrorists on the same grounds.
2. Approval for seizure of propert by NIA: If the investigation is conducted by an officer of the NIA, the approval of the Director General of NIA would be required for seizure of properties that my be connected with terrorism.
3. Investigation by NIA: The bill additionally empowers the officers of NIA, of the rank of inspector or above, to investigate cases.
4. Insertion to schedule of treaties: The Act defines terrorist acts to include acts committed winthin the scope of any of the treaties listed in a schedule to the Act. The schedule lists 9 trieties, including the Convention for the suppression of Terrorist Bombings(1997), and the Convention against Taking of Hostages(1979). The Bill also adds another treaty to the list.That is Inernational Convention for suppression of Acts of Nuclear Terrorism(2005) .
Even though the bill act as deterance to all unlawful practices of terrorist,it also inhibits some provisions which are not plausible
1. The Act introduces a vague definition of terrorism to encompass a wide range of non- violent political activity, including political protest.
2. It empowers the government to declare an orgnisation as 'terrorist' and ban it. Mere membership of organisation makes itself as a criminal offence.
3. It allows detention without a chargesheet for upto 180 days and police custody can be up to 30 days.
4. It created a strong presumption against bail and anticipatory bail is out of thr question.
5. It authorises the creation of special courts with wide discretion to hold in-camera proceedings and use secret witnesses but contain no sunset clause and provisions of mandatory periodic review.
1. It empowers officials to brand any person "a terrorist", without following due process.
2. It does not provide any legal consequence in case an individual is designated as terrorist.
3. The only statutory remedy available to such a person is to make an application before the central government for de-notification, which will be considered by a Review committte constituted by the government itself.
4. An official designation as terrorist will be akin to 'civil death' for a person, with social boycott, expulsion form job, hounding by media and perhaps attack from self proclaimed vigilante groups.
5. The law could target minorities or section of people thereby affecting their cultural rights. In digital connected world the facts and fictions are all mixed up. The fact checking of news through social media is less prevalent.
The concerns of the vast pool of human activists need to be noted and should accomodate the necessary checks and balance before enforcing the law. This does not mean the threats and security of the nation is less important. For any nation to be prosperous and well governed, security need to be robust and well functioned with minimum errors.
Comments
Post a Comment