Need For Anti-Terrorism Laws in India

November 26th, 2008 the city of Mumbai woke to a macabre morning. Mumbai was burning. The gory fire of terrorism has engulfed the entire city and the heat waves could be felt throughout the country and all over the world.23 blasts in less than 24hours and 7 terror attacks shook the nation which has advocated peace and harmony for a period immemorial. It took the authorities approximately 40 hours, more than 200 lives and loss of immense property to bring down the terrorists and get the city going on a normal pace.

 If we go by facts in India, more than 600 people have been killed and hundreds have been injured in the last 6 years. In 2008, India has been time and again threatened by these terror attacks. To mention a few the Assam blasts on 30th October, 2008 which caused 45 deaths and over 100 causalities; Malegaon in Maharashtra and Modara in Gujrat which had also been targeted; 20 synchronized bomb blasts on July 26th in Ahmedabad which killed 57 people; 13th May when Jaipur witnessed 7 blasts within 12minutes, should have woken the central legislative authorities in scrutinizing the failure of intelligence and various laws dealing with terrorism. But apart from lionizing the situation and regretting the aftermath, the authorities have been sitting on their responsibilities.

 Why is it so that the government has been still disinclined to take stringent rules after so many vile incidents causing loss of life and property and spreading terror amongst the general public? What is it that holds the apex authorities from taking precise steps in curbing these terrorist attacks? Is it the nexus between our high profile politicians and the bunch of people who call themselves the freedom fighters and actually execute terrorism to its core? Is it the poor intelligence of our security services or the lack of proper law enforcement or is it the rampant corruption that prevails in the very veins of our system?

 Terrorism has been a part of this human civilization since its evolution and is not a concept of the new economic world but the means, ways and methods of terrorizing has become more gruesome, destructive and lethal in due course of time. As for a fact, there is no agreed definition of the term “Terrorism”. The Webster Dictionary gives a definition of it as,

                            “The systematic use of terror especially as means of coercion.”

Thus it may be concluded that any or every act which causes fear is a terror act. Terrorism may also include acts of unlawful violence and war. There is a old adage that, “one man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter”.

Terrorism is in sense the segregation and marginalization of certain sections of society by the State itself and its machinery, which often leads to great upheaval and dissatisfaction in that group. This in turn results in the group adopting violent, incorrect and lethal ways to address their needs, demands and grievances.

LAWS ADOPTED BY DIFFERENT COUNTRIES TO CHECK TERRORISM

1.      South Africa

In the Republic of South Africa, a act called the “Terrorism Act No. 83” was passed in 1967. This was the first attempt by the government on a law which will specifically deal with terrorism. This act defined the word terrorism as “anything that might endanger the maintenance of law and order”.

Section 6 of the act stated that, “someone suspected of terrorism to be detained for an indefinite period without trial on the authority of a senior police officer”.

The South African Bureau of State Security was established keeping in mind the provisions of the Terrorism Act No. 83. The bureau’s job was to monitor National Security. The chairman of the South African Bureau of State Security was Hendrik Van Den Bergh. This bureau gave way for the National Intelligence Service in 1980. Eventually the National Intelligence Service was replaced by South African Secret Service and the National Intelligence Agency with the passing of the Intelligence Act in 1994.

2.      United Kingdom

The United Kingdom has been very active in taking a vigilance of various aspects and measures to curb Terror acts from a very long time. Many Terrorism acts were passed between 1974-1989 by the government of Britain. The United Kingdom has terrorist laws for the last 30 years initially to deal with the trouble in Northern Ireland.

  With the passage of time and the concept of terrorism taking stronger grip and becoming more heinous the Terrorism Laws were modified and a number of amendments was brought about. The result was an array of stringent and strict anti terrorism laws was enacted. Though these laws were frequently criticized and put down by various Human Rights Groups, the British government did go ahead with them.

    Terrorism laws were taken seriously after the 9/11 attacks. The United Kingdom passed the Terrorism Act in 2000. It was an emergency legislation to increase powers to deal with individuals suspected of planning or assisting terrorist attacks within the United Kingdom.

Subsequently, the Anti terrorism, Crime and Security Act, was passed in 2001. It deals with resident foreigners suspected of terrorism could be interned without trial, if they could not be deported to another country without breaching British Human rights legislation.

3.      United States Of America

After the whole world witnessed the worst terror attack in its history on 9th September, the United States of America passed the PATRIOT Act. The then president of the USA, George Walker Bush signed into law the PATRIOT Act. It is an acronym for, United and Strengthening   America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001.

    The prominent outcome of the PATRIOT Act was the increased ability of the law enforcement agencies to search every records and documents. The restrictions on foreign intelligence gathering within the United States were eased. Apart from that the regulation of financial transactions by the Secretary of the Treasury’s authority was expanded. Also, the discretion of law enforcement and immigration authorities in detaining and deporting immigrants suspected of terrorism related acts were enhanced.

It is said that the good governance is the panacea to all ills. When all the governments in and around the world are taking precise steps and enforcing various laws to check and impede the terrorist organizations and activities, India has taken a retrograde stand and repealed the only anti terrorism law it had.

India may be a easy target for the terrorists or people who call themselves so because of the very reason that India doesn’t have any official law to tackle the problem of Terrorism. The country has proved to be unable to curb the activities of barred organizations like Student Islamic Movement of India (SIMI). Due to absence of strict laws the government has failed to go ahead with execution of the death sentence of convicted terrorists like Afzal Guru. The Congress government’s major undertaking after coming to power was the repealing of the Prevention of the Terrorism Act. India doesn’t even have a proper legal backing to deal with terrorism. While many nations world over strengthened their anti terror laws after 9/11, our country have taken retrograde steps by abolishing POTA. Thus there is an urgent need of an Anti terrorism law in India.

Two laws in India were enacted to deal with the menace of terrorism in different times. These two laws were heavily criticized and reprimanded by various parts of the society on the account that, these were contradictory and affected the Human Rights of the people. It was also argued that anti terrorism laws vitiated the due process of law. There was n uproar in all sections of the society and they were consequently repealed. That they flouted the basic concepts of legal infrastructure cannot be negated. A lot of criticisms have been faced by the Anti Terrorism Laws like, there is a lot of chances of the innocent getting convicted and harassed. Due to racist and caste feelings in this country it is very much possible than any individual who is innocent can fall a prey to such acts and suffer. Anti Terrorism Laws are also said to be misused all over the world, especially it could be so in India. The police mechanism of extracting confession by torture is refutable, and there is an acute lack of transparency in the government functioning in India. It is also said that harsh terrorist laws may alienate the common people and the police. This is exactly what the terrorist want to spread –hatred and revenge, ill feeling, disharmony in all and every person. Thus no matter how hard the Anti terrorism laws are criticized and discredited, they are the need of the hour.

Previous laws in India, to deal with terrorism were- the Terrorism and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act and the Prevention of Terrorism Act.

Terrorism and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act was passed in 1985 and amended in 1987. Though the TADA was repealed in 1995. The Indian Government then introduced the Prevention of Terrorism Ordinance (POTO) on October 2001 and the legislature passed the prevention of Terrorism Act (POTA) on March 2002. The main reasons why this laws were abhorred and finally repealed was because it was thought to be in violation of many fundamental Human rights enshrined in constitution of India.

Though it was struck down, the Prevention of Terrorism Act was an important legislative step by the government. This act was enacted on June 2002. Some of the salient features of the Prevention of Terrorism Act were:

   1. It allowed detention of a suspect for up to 180 days without filing in charges in court.
   2. It allowed law enforcement agencies to with hold the identities of witnesses and treats a confession made to the police as an admission of guilt.
   3. Some 800 people were arrested and jailed under the Prevention of Terrorism Act.
   4. 4000 people across the country were also booked under the Act.
   5. 32 organizations were banned as terrorists’ organization by the government.

The National Security Act was also passed along with the Unlawful Activities (prevention) Act to check terrorism.

Severity of the earlier laws and their misuse only serves to underline the need to reframe the laws. Anti terrorism laws are an absolute necessity for society and it should not be treated as political issues even if the implementation is questioned by Human Rights Forum. Terrorism is not a passing phase thus the laws should be efficient, but should take some considerations like:

   1. The Anti Terrorism laws should not be in contravention to any rule of law. The laws should be within the realm of legal principles.
   2. The Anti Terrorism laws should be uniform and equal for everyone. There should be uniform application and execution of the laws.
   3. The definition of terrorism should be precisely narrowed down to exclude criminal activities. Acts where the essence of terror is missing should not be included in the purview of the special laws. This would avoid unnecessary conviction and harassment of convicted persons.
   4. There should be greater protection given to the witnesses so that there is greater participation and co operation by the meek public without any fear and influence.
   5. The terrorist organizations and other such organizations with the potential to become terrorist organization irrespective of whether terrorist acts are committed by them or not has to be sanctioned by law. Constant surveillance of its leaders, members and supporters is required.
   6.  Transparency and review procedures would have to be clearly set out in the newly enacted law.
   7. There should be establishment of specialized agencies to lessen the burden of the enforcement agency of the state. So that the activities under the special law are properly carried out.
   8. The state has to be empowered by law to prevent recruitment of cadres rising of funds and other form of support by propaganda and to scrutinize and freeze funds and assets.

After the carnage in Mumbai the government is planning to invoke the National Security Act, to tighten laws to deal with terrorism. The centre is also in favour to set up a federal investigation agency and tighten the laws to deal with terrorism more effectively. The government has also promised to choke the infiltration links and funds to ensure that such elements pay a heavy price for such cowardly and horrific acts of terrorism. While the NSA would be used to deal with situations of this kind exiting laws would be tightened to ensure that there were no loopholes available to terrorists to escape the clutches of law.

We need to win people over, so that there are no more recruits, no needless harassment and torture to support the public. India needs an anti terrorism law but we need to first strengthen the law enforcement machinery. Be more security enabled and sharpen our intelligence services. To stymie terrorist organizations’ and weaken the capabilities of terrorist organization there is an urgent need to enact counter terrorist laws. Anti Terrorism laws should be viewed as an efficient response within the rule of law. With the NSA Coming into force  India has also come in the league of nations boasting of efficient Anti Terrorism Laws and legislations during these troubled times. Counter terrorism laws should be viewed as safeguards for collective security. It is the efficient implementation of the laws that need to be analyzed, rectified and addressed to, the need for Anti Terrorism laws should not be questioned.