Return of Draconian Law: Gujarat Control of Terrorism and Organized Crime Bill, 2015

Must Read

What is the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016?

The Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 (“RERA”) is an Act of the Parliament. It seeks to protect...

Should the Exorbitant Amounts Charged for RT-PCR Tests be Refunded?

Introduction A plea has been filed in the Honourable Supreme Court of India seeking a refund of exorbitant amounts charged...

Should CCTV’s be Installed in the Police Station?

Introduction In a recent judgment, the bench led by Justice Nariman issued directions to both the state and Union Territory...

A Legal Analysis of the West Bengal Political Crisis on IPS Deputation

The Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) has recently summoned three IPS officers of West Bengal (WB). The decision was...

Explained: Postal Ballot for NRIs

At the end of November 2020, Election Commission sent a proposal to the law ministry to amend the Representation...

Explained: Constitutional Provisions and Legislations With Regards to a Person with Disabilities

The world celebrates December 3 as International Day of Persons with Disabilities (IDPD). This day is also called World...

Follow us

TADA, POTA, AFSPA, MCOCA and now GCOTOC. While I thought that the world and particularly India is championing forward safeguarding Human Rights, my illusion faded when I found myself reading one day about this anti terror law which has been rejected thrice by the President and unsurprisingly passed four times by the Gujarat Assembly.This articles starts by clearing the air around this Act which has made it subject to heavy criticism and scrutiny with the relevant Sections and Clauses concerned. Then it discusses one of the relevant rights of the Centre to form laws on the issue of national defense and security. The impact of previous laws has been shortly giving way to the part where the author expresses her/his opinion that this law is now an issue of amalgamation of ego and pride to Modi and this Act, irrelevant of the criticism, will be passed and rest will be history. This article ends with the hope that this law will be rejected and the controversial Clauses and Sections in it will be deleted, as there is no denying the fact that slight stringent laws are necessary for the protection of citizens but at the cost of stumbling upon their own fundamental rights.

Power, this word has the capacity to turn the fundamental nature of human being into brutal and harsh and giving them the feeling the righteousness in that act. While I studied Political Science the basic approach is to start from reading Divine Origin theory where the concept of state was not present and slowly state c underwent transformation and a social contract theory was formed between individual and state which involved individuals giving up their rights in lieu of the protection of right. This concept given by Hobbes involved a monarchy followed by Locke and Rousseau which naturally changed the form of government. What the author is trying to say is that in those years the basic need was the protection of life which is still the basic human right of every citizen and when this Act will be enforced few citizens will be living in a bubble in which their lives will be secured and simultaneously Gujarat will become a Hobbesian jungle for others. The number of times the Act has been rejected by President -THREE was not enough for the Gujarat Assembly to understand the gravity of the situation and the future this anti terror law beholds once it is passed. Not surprisingly almost every State has walked on this path including Madhya Pradesh and Karnataka. This Bill is a modified version of the Gujarat Control of Organised Crime Bill (GUJCOC) with just the word ‘Terrorism’ added to it. The reason for criticism is simple, Alok Prasanna Kumar in his article“Unconstitutionality of Anti Terror laws” expresses his opinion that heavy questions and doubts have been raised by SAHDRC concerning the constitutional validity of GCTOC Bill in terms of violation of civil liberties and potential abuse of powers and due process of the state authorities. This Bill according to him is ultra vires .

State Legislatures definitely posses exclusive power to form laws on “public order” while both Parliament and State Legislatures possess concurrent power to make laws relating to “criminal law” and “criminal procedure.”While both these terms on first instance seem as overlapping concepts, “public order,”“law and order” and “security of State” are different categories of offences where the critical difference is in the gravity of offence. This Bill starts with declaring the concern of the Gujarat Assembly over the activities going on and the need to curb this activity. But the Gujarat State Assembly has forgottten that after Gujarat Riots, Gujarat as a state has been peaceful for the past 10-15 years. Author admits the presence of stringent laws to tackle unlawful activities but a Bill under which one can be in jail for 180 days on the basis of telephonic conversation and evidence being admissible in front of trial court given to superintendent while simultaneously believing absolutely on the good faith of authority is if not draconian then what else should one call it? This Bill extends the duration of custody to 180 days and it is hard to assume the extent of torture which will be rendered upon people accused of terroristic activities to compel them for confession. This violates our fundamental right to not give statement as per our own will. Under subsection 5 of S 20 the bail will be denied to the accused on the simple reason that he was out on bail under this or any other law. The most disturbing provision is Section 16 of the Act which renders confession made to be police of Superintendent position as admissible which is against the criminal fundamentals of our system. This part has been borrowed from MCOCA.S 14 allows evidence to collect through telephonic interception. S 25 of this Act believes absolutely on the good faith of state government, any officer or authority of the state government by providing them immunity for act done in pursuance of this Act. This is another similarity that it shares with MCOCA. The Bill has increased the custody period under normal law of 90 days to 180 days. The contradiction with other criminal laws and existing similarities with other Anti –Terror laws are glaring . POTA before this Act had given permission for interception of communications to collect evidence. One fact to watch out is this that twice this Bill has been introduced by Modi and it would be interesting if he expresses his opinion on this as forming laws on national defense is a central act which he violated in the past. The potential of this law to transform people’s lives is immensely large. This Bill violates our fundamental right of a fair trial and the right to be heard. It is ironical to the author that passing anti terror law is seen as a solution for our Parliamentarians and not focusing on the efficiency of Police Forces. In the leading national magazine The Frontline it was reported that the Amnesty International has stated that Around 77000 people had been arbitrarily arrested under the TADA and thousands were tortured with a view to extract confessions from them. Of these arrested 72000 were released later on. Even after a decade after the TADA lapsed 147 people are still under detention.

Even United States implemented the Patriots act after the 9/11 incident and this act underwent some changes to become more balanced with the spirit of the constitution.

In the end Author believes absolutely without any exception that this law particularly has the utmost potential of travelling the path of TADA and POTA and may be even much more than that. In the light of justice and good conscience we sometime tremble, stumble and maybe lose our path but our Parliamentarians need to trace their steps to the spirit of our constitution. .

Latest News

[WhatsApp Privacy Policy Row] It’s a Private App, Don’t Use It; Says Delhi High Court

On Monday, while hearing a petition regarding the privacy policy of WhatsApp, the Delhi High Court said, “It is a private app. Don't join it. It is a voluntary thing, don't accept it. Use some other app.”

Madras High Court Asks the State To Reconsider Number of Seats Allotted for Bcm Category

Mr. Shakkiya filed a Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Indian Constitution to issue a Writ of Mandamus. The petition sought to direct...

Gujarat High Court Directs To Register Name of Petitioners in the Society Records as Owners of Property, as per Will

A single-judge bench of Gujarat High Court consisting of Honourable Justice Biren Vaishnav, because probate wasn’t necessary and that the petitioners were entitled to...

If No Complaint Is Filed, No Further Orders Are Required To Be Passed: Telangana High Court

Excerpt In Matlakunta Sundaramma vs The State Of Telangana, on January 8, 2021, the Telangana High Court decided that there is no requirement of passing...

Gujarat High Court Allows Report Filed by Official Liquidator for Dissolution of the Company

The present report had been filed by the Official Liquidator for the dissolution of M/s AtRo Limited under the provisions of Section 497 (6)...

Parents of Road Accident Victim Entitled To Compensation: Delhi High Court

Justice JR Midha said, “Even if parents are not dependent on their children at the time of an accident, they will certainly be dependent, both financially and emotionally, upon them at the later stage of their life, as the children were dependent upon their parents in their initial years.”

Plea Challenging the AIBE Rules Framed by BCI Filed in the Supreme Court

A Writ Petition was presently filed in the Supreme Court by a newly enrolled lawyer challenging the All India Bar Examination Rules 2010 which have been framed by the Bar Council of India which mandates that an advocate has to qualify for the All India Bar Examination (AIBE) to practice law after enrollment.

Bombay High Court: Mere Presence at the Crime Scene Not Enough for Punishment

The Bombay High Court ruled that it cannot be considered a crime if a person is merely present at the crime scene which falls under the Maharashtra Prohibition of Obscene Dance in Hotels and Restaurants and Bar Rooms and Protection of Dignity of Women Act 2016. It also quashed two First Information Reports (FIR) against two individuals who were arrested in a raid at a dance bar by the Santacruz Police, in 2017.

CAIT Files a Plea Against WhatsApp’s New Privacy Policy in the Supreme Court

Confederation of All India Traders (CAIT) has filed a petition against WhatsApp’s new privacy rules in the Supreme Court. The petition says that WhatsApp which is known to render public services by providing a platform to communicate has recently imposed a privacy policy that is unconstitutional, which not only goes against the fundamental rights of citizens but also jeopardizes the national security of our country.

RTI Activist Files a Plea in Bombay High Court Against Bharat Biotech’s Covaxin

On Saturday, a plea has been filed before the Bombay High Court by an activist stating that Bharat Biotech Covaxin had not been granted full approval but a restricted use in clinical trials according to the Drugs Comptroller General of India. The Company's phase 3 trials are ongoing and the DGCI has not made any data available in the public domain for peer- review by independent scientists.

More Articles Like This

- Advertisement -