The Hindu : POTA must not be used against opponents, say jurists

Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Saturday, Jul 13, 2002

National

National

POTA must not be used against opponents, say jurists

By J. Venkatesan

NEW DELHI JULY 12. Eminent jurists such as F.S. Nariman are of the opinion that the arrest of the MDMK leader and MP, Vaiko, is nothing but "misuse" of the provisions of the Prevention of Terrorism Act.

POTA is meant to curb terrorism and effectively deal with terrorists and not as a weapon against political opponents, they say.

Mr. Nariman, who is also a Rajya Sabha MP, feels that the core issue is whether POTA can be used against a person to curb political freedom and free speech in the absence of any other activity. "When the chips are down, you can become an opponent.''

Voicing the apprehension that POTA would be misused against politicians in future, he says that there must be "in-House" mechanism under POTA to go into the question of each arrest to determine whether it is warranted or not.

"Since the promulgation of the ordinance, I have been warning the Government to introduce built-in safeguards to prevent its misuse but the Government was bent on somehow passing the legislation''.

According to the former Union Law Minister, Shanthi Bhushan, ``unless he (Mr. Vaiko) has subscribed to any violent doctrine, I don't see that mere extension of support for any terrorist organisation by itself without supporting its terrorist activity, is sufficient to put a person behind bars''.

"It is the mistake of political parties not to have incorporated sufficient safeguards to prevent the misuse of the legislation.''

The senior Supreme Court lawyer, Rajeev Dhavan says: "It is really unfortunate that POTA is being used against Mr. Vaiko for what appears to be a political speech. It is a clear case of abuse of the statutory provisions and to stifle political speech''. According to him, the real purpose for which POTA is enacted is to deal with terrorism and terrorists and not "to settle scores with politicians".

Another senior lawyer (who does not want to be quoted) feels that the Centre has sufficient powers under Section 25 of the POTA to move the Supreme Court for transfer of the case against Mr. Vaiko from a court in Madurai to some other special court in another State on the ground that "it is not possible to have a fair, impartial or speedy trial... or it is not otherwise in the interests of justice''.

Printer friendly page
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

National