National
NHRC chief cautions Govt. on misuse of POTO
By J. Venkatesan
NEW DELHI, DEC. 5. The Chairperson of the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC), Mr. Justice J.S. Verma, while maintaining that there was no need for a special law to combat terrorism, has cautioned the Government that certain provisions of the Prevention of Terrorism Ordinance (POTO) had the dangerous potential of being misused by enforcement agencies, posing great threat to the human rights of innocent people.
Mr. Justice Verma is of the view that the experience of the working of stringent laws like the MISA during Emergency and the TADA in the recent past with no improvement in the performance and police culture is a lesson to be remembered while devising new strategies to combat terrorism.
Referring to some of the harsh provisions of POTO, he says the reversal of the burden of proof for bail for one year and before filing of chargesheet is contrary to a basic principle of jurisprudence, apart from the unfair requirement from the accused to perform the impossible task of proving at that stage that he is not guilty.
Admissibility in evidence of statement recorded by a police officer for graver offence under POTO, when the Evidence Act continues to make it inadmissible, is incongruous; the definition of `offence' is also vague and nebulous enlarging the scope for misuse of power, he adds.
Expressing his anguish over the repeated statements of senior Union Ministers justifying POTO, he says ``it is disturbing to hear the comments of some responsible persons that expression of concern for the protection of human rights, particularly of the innocents in combating terrorism can be construed as tacit support to terrorism.''
He feels that ``intolerance to any voice of dissent is a great danger to the democratic ethos in which the right to freedom of speech is sacrosanct,''and the ``voice of reason and sanity'' should not be muffled.
Mr. Justice Verma also reiterates that IPC Sections 76, 79 and 96 to 106, 120 A, 120 B, 121 to 130, 124A (sedition), 153 A and 153 B; Sec. 46 Cr.P.C.; Arms Act; Explosives and Explosive Substances Act; Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act; Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act and preventive detention laws like NSA, COFEPOSA etc dealing with terrorism could be suitably amended to cover the deficient areas.
Send this article to Friends by
E-Mail
National
|
