[Reader-list] POTO

[zamrooda]

TADA with a human face is how one may rationalise the new Anti- Terrorist
 Bill-POTO.This bill has given rise to a lot of debate and unrest, and
 rightly so. The bill as in the TADA leaves the defination of Terrorist,
 terrorist organisations members and gangs vague and undefined. Credit to the
 bill that the term disruptive activities has been done away with which was
 an integral part of the TADA. The Indian Penal Code states that a confession
 in police custody or a confession given to a police man is not admissible in
 the court of law. The POTO Bill disagreeing with this clause goes on to
 allow such confessions. The only relief it provides is that the confession
 is to be made in front of a high ranking office. Does the Rank make a
 difference is the point to be understood. All would be aware of the fact
 that most of the arrests  under the TADA  Act were  in liaison with the
 State Government! Another notably addition is section 61 of the Bill. This
 section give the Government the power to make new rules in accordance to the
 demands of the situation . Another words to make rules and regulations to
 suit its own needs. What more could the ruling agencies want? Its a perfect
 blanket cover. The Indian Penal Court allows one and all to the Right to
 Defense. Yet the Bill gives an adverse meaning to this same right. A person 
 found withholding information could be convicted under this Bill, and it is
 of no significance weather he/she was withholding the information for
 his/her right to defense. One of the safe guards mentioned in this Bill is
 that a person arrested has to be presented in front of the judiciary within
 48hrs. But at the same time it also allows for the judiciary to remand the
 person back to the police custody and not for one, two or three days but for
 30 days.......What kind of a safe guard is this only the drafting committee
 can explain. And may be this along with other controversies may be the
 reason why this Bill was not presented to the NHRC for its comments. By now
 one may be wondering where the idea or the justification of this kind of
 Bill comes from; especially when a similar Act TADA has been recently banned
 ? One did not have to think too Far, we conveniently go back to where all
 our laws come from The United Kingdom. Isn't it ironical that almost 60
 years into our freedom from that country yet we justify our laws on their
 system.

Media and in particular Journalist are seen attacking this Bill tooth and
 nail. Take a look at section 3(8), and one would realise the precarious
 position that the press and media has been put forth by this Bill. In
 simpler words it says that it is mandatory for the press to reveal its
 sources of information. Which is simply hitting the ethics of journalism.

At this point of time one thought that comes to ones mind is that if India is
 really keen on putting an end to terrorist activities then why has it not
 ratified and become a part of the International Criminal Court. Could it be
 something to do with Article 7 of the Crime Against Humanity Act which
 brings in both officials and non officials under its preview.

One of the most important things to my mind after all the debate on this Bill
 is the Question that do we really need this kind of an Act ? India with its
 longest written constitution in the world; does it have no provisions for
 such crimes against Humanity and State ? Or is it simply the will of the
 political parties to go on suppressing its people?

-------------------------------------------------------
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/reader-list/attachments/20011109/9c25096c/attachment.html