|
THE NATION: ANTI-TERRORISM
ORDINANCE
Clause And Effect
The Opposition runs down the new ordinance to combat
terrorism, saying it's just a tool to target minorities. But despite criticism,
POTO seems all set to become law.
By Lakshmi Iyer
| |
|
| |
THE NOOSE TIGHTENS: Suspected militants
under arrest in Srinagar
|
Against
the backdrop of heightened post-September 11 terrorist threats, the Government
promulgated on October 24 the Prevention of Terrorism Ordinance (POTO).
It seeks to arm the authorities with sweeping powers to detect and prevent
terrorist activities, detain suspects, and freeze funds and properties
held by them. The ordinance, promulgated four weeks before Parliament's
winter session, has peeved the Opposition, which has dubbed it draconian.
|
MIXED SIGNALS
|
|
|
|
Sonia Gandhi's
Ambivalence gives the Government hope for tacit support from the
Congress.
|
|
|
|
Buddhadeb Bhattacharya
Is forced by the CPI-M to shelve
a draft law to fight organised crime.
|
|
|
|
M. Karunanidhi
Embarrasses the NDA by suggesting
that debate should have preceded the ordinance.
|
At the all-party meeting convened to discuss
the Afghan situation on October 30, the Government displayed no inclination
to build consensus on the issue. External Affairs Minister Jaswant Singh
made a passing reference to the ordinance while the Opposition, barring
Congress President Sonia Gandhi, cried itself hoarse over it.
Sonia's silence shocked the rest of the Opposition.
It was particularly a setback to the CPI(M) whose Central Committee had
peremptorily instructed West Bengal Chief Minister Buddhadeb Bhattacharya-who
has echoed the Centre's concerns on Pakistan's ISI-sponsored subversion
in the border districts of his state-to shelve the ordinance to curb organised
crime. However, just when the Left began second guessing the Congress'
intentions, the main opposition party explained that Sonia had not spoken
about POTO because it was too technical.
Why should partisan politics intrude into a
law against terrorism? POTO's precursor, the Terrorist and Disruptive
Activities (Prevention) Act (TADA), 1987, was, after all, passed unanimously
by Parliament. So, are there expected dividends at present from opposing
curbs on terrorism?
The Opposition, it seems, sees POTO through the
prism of the Uttar Pradesh assembly elections, as a tool to terrorise
Muslims. It perceives the ordinance as an extension of the Government's
September-end ban on the Students' Islamic Movement of India (SIMI). "The
ordinance is linked to the Uttar Pradesh elections," says Congress
leader Kapil Sibal. "The BJP wants to use the ordinance to polarise
votes. They have banned simi twice over. Soon, they will start arresting
people, accusing them of having ISI links. When we protest, we will be
accused of aiding terrorists."
The Government feels it has public opinion on
its side. "India has no option but to approve the bill. If Parliament
does not pass the bill, it would only leave a smile on the face of the
terrorist," says Union Law Minister Arun Jaitley. On TV, he accused
Sibal of being "terrorist-friendly". This combativeness has
hardened the opposition stand-something the BJP doesn't seem to mind.
"The Government is using POTO to dare the
Congress to defy Hindu sentiments. The Congress cannot be emotionally
blackmailed into backing the bill," declares Congress spokesperson
S. Jaipal Reddy. He feels POTO was drafted to support the ban on SIMI.
Reddy, of course, is silent on the stringent anti-crime law passed by
the Congress-led Government in Maharashtra.
Home Ministry officials are appalled by the
opposition to the bill. "Osama bin Laden and Mullah Omar have declared
India as one of their targets," argues a senior official. "We
needed a tougher law to freeze funds and intercept messages. POTO is imperative
for national security." He says the ban on SIMI will be subjected
to judicial scrutiny.
The Government, of course, has a high stake
in ensuring that Parliament approves POTO. There are international commitments,
including the September 28 un Security Council resolution requiring member
states to adhere to measures dealing with terrorism. The Home Ministry
has now decided to build public opinion in favour of POTO.
The ministry is particularly keen to allay fears
of the media over curbs on its freedom. Section 3(8) and 14 of POTO place
responsibility on all persons, except on the legal attorney of the accused,
to disclose information to the police that might prevent terrorist acts.
"The obligations to disclose information is already there under Section
39 of the Criminal Procedure Code and Section 187 of the Penal Code; only
the punishment in POTO is heavier," argues Jaitley.
It is being contended that POTO is a clone of
TADA, which was allowed to lapse in 1995 after a National Human Rights
Commission survey found it was being abused and the conviction rate was
less than 2 per cent Officials, however, argue POTO is a vast improvement
on TADA. It has safeguards against abuse of confession. If a chargesheet
is not filed within a year, other relevant laws become applicable. Provisions
for bail are less stringent than under TADA. There is also scope for appeal
to the high courts. Under TADA, appeal was restricted to the Supreme Court.
POTO, in fact, is modelled on anti-terrorism laws in countries like the
US and Britain.
The safeguards don't impress the sceptics. "The
POTO may well be a vast improvement on TADA. The safeguards are all fine,
provided we are dealing with an honest enforcement agency and an independent
judiciary," says Supreme Court lawyer Prashant Bhushan.
That may well be, but POTO is not exactly a
knee-jerk reaction to September 11. The Home Ministry has, in the past
two years, been evolving a consensus on a draft law prepared by the Law
Commission. It discussed provisions of a draft with the states in two
conferences. Barring four states, everyone else agreed to more draconian
provisions than are contained in the ordinance, assures the Home Ministry.
Which means that POTO might just survive as a law. After a simulated fight
linked to elections in Uttar Pradesh.
|
METRO TODAY
Web
Exclusives
