People's Democracy

Prakash Karat

THE central cabinet recently approved a new ordinance, the Prevention of Terrorism Ordinance, 2001 (POTO). The government was emboldened to take this step after the United States declared "war on global terrorism". Utilising the current atmosphere, it hoped to push through the anti-terrorist bill to replace the notorious TADA, which lapsed in 1995.

It is important to remember the experience of TADA which existed as a law between 1987 and 1995. Of the 76,036 detainees under TADA, the conviction rate was less than one per cent. The largest number of detainees under TADA was in Gujarat, where there were no terrorist activities of the type that was witnessed in Punjab, or, Assam. Using this law, the state government in Gujarat targetted the minority community on a large scale.

When the life of TADA ended in 1995 during the Narasimha Rao government, due to the concerted opposition from all democratic forces, the act was allowed to lapse. After that, the then Congress government introduced the Criminal Law Amendment Bill, 1995 which retained the essential provisions of TADA. By amending the Criminal Procedure Code, these features would have been permanently put on the statute books. This and other objectionable features, led to the bill being kept pending.

When that effort failed, the BJP-led government came forward with the Prevention of Terrorism Bill, 2000, which was based on the Law Commission's proposals. The current bill, on which the ordinance is based, has more stringent provisions than the 1995 Criminal Law Amendment Bill. If there was large-scale misuse of TADA by the state governments belonging to the Congress and the BJP, in the present situation, a similar draconian act would prove much more dangerous with the BJP in power at the centre.

The Ordinance contains highly objectionable clauses such as a period of police remand upto 30 days; making it the duty of a person in possession of information relating to offences to report it, failing to do so making one liable for charges; and the judicial process through special courts where the rights of the accused are severely restricted. It is for these and other reasons that the National Human Rights Commission had come out against the PoT Bill, 2000.

The Home Ministry, under L.K. Advani, has made it amply clear that it considers "Islamic terrorism" the main threat to internal security. While it is true that Islamic fundamentalism has motivated recruits for terrorist activities, not only in Jammu & Kashmir but elsewhere in the country, according to the BJP-led government, no such threat emanates from Hindu extremist activities. The recommendations of the Group of Ministers on Reforming the National Security System released in February, 2001 reveals this distorted perception. While the report focuses on the threat of Islamic fundamentalism, it deliberately ignores the role of Hindu extremism with its attacks and pogroms against minorities, which in turn have fuelled the growth of Muslim fundamentalism. That is why Advani gives a clean certificate to the Bajrang Dal while railing against Muslim fundamentalist organisations.

With such an outlook and with the prevailing global campaign against "Islamic terrorism" led by the USA, the earlier bias of TADA will be a hundred-fold magnified while implementing the current ordinance.

Who is liable to be detained under the POTO? If Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Rajnath Singh has his way, he would lock up all Muslims who express opposition to the US attack on Afghanistan, as sympathisers of Osama bin Laden. The central and many state governments would conveniently use the detention powers to lock up trade union leaders and militant activists of popular struggles. If the Delhi police has its way, even students who leaflet against America's war would be booked under the new ordinance.

The TADA was used not only against minorities, but it was also deployed to suppress the strikes of the working class and trade union activities. One such example was the use of TADA in 1992 by the BJP-led government in Himachal Pradesh against the striking state government employees.

There are laws already existing in the statute book which provide for preventive detention. There is the National Security Act (NSA), the ESMA, and specific laws like the Armed Forces Special Powers Act which is in use in places like Jammu & Kashmir and the North-East. There is no reason whatsoever for adding one more law which will threaten the democratic rights of citizens.

The record of the BJP central and state governments is appalling when it comes to dealing with different types of terrorism. Not a single Bajrang Dal or VHP activist who indulged in violence and terrorising the minorities in Gujarat was proceeded against; none of the special laws, which they readily use against the minorities, trade union workers and inconvenient activists of people's struggles, were invoked Given the present state of affairs, investigation and booking of an offence by a police officer of the rank of DSP is no safeguard. The police will act arbitrarily, in many cases, motivated by corrupt and perverse interests to indict innocent people.

The BJP-led government has adopted one anti-democratic measure after another. In May this year, the Home Ministry issued a directive that "every householder or other person" should report to the officer-in-charge of the nearest police station about the "arrival or presence in his household or in any premises occupied by him or under his control, of any foreigner". The word "foreigner" includes persons of Indian origin who hold foreign passports. Violation of this directive would attract a prison term upto five years, or a fine, or both. This is a potent weapon in the hands of the police to harass innocent citizens who host their relatives who live abroad.

Next, in June this year, Advani's Ministry put restrictions on international seminars and conferences where the subject matter is "political, semi-political, communal or religious in nature, or is related to human rights". To hold even academic seminars involving foreign scholars on these subjects, prior clearance is required from the Home Ministry. Further, specific permission will have to be taken to invite persons from five countries -- China, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka -- all our neighbouring countries. This constitutes a serious attack on academic freedom.

The BJP government's steady erosion of democratic rights must be fought back. The PoT ordinance must be scrapped. It cannot be legislated into an Act. The entire Opposition in Parliament should unitedly defeat this move.