I read somewhere, when one increasingly talks of democracy, it should be construed to mean a movement by the majority to suppress the rights of a minority. Can’t recall where I read it, but thought that there was in inherent fallacy in that statement. However, if one were to look at the recent amendments to the Gujarat Control of Organised Crime Act (GujCOCA) he or she would agree with that statement as I have.
The Unlawful Activities Prevention Act does not remain the harshest penal statute anymore. Gujarat has clearly beaten the Centre in this case. The President (indirectly the Union Cabinet) had suggested changes to three crucial amendments to the State bill, which the Gujarat gov. rejected and passed unanimously. These include;
- Making confessions before a police officer legal
- Extending the period of detention of a person standing trial from the present 90 days to 180 days. This also includes increasing the time period for a police custody and filing of a chargesheet.
- that courts cannot grant bail to an accused without hearing the public prosecutor.
The UPA government did try to take a ‘more humane’ approach to the Bill by asking the Gujarat Government to amend/ delete certain provisions. However, in a political tussle, Modi, as usual accused the Centre for being soft on terror. It is funny how asking a government to make its laws in consonance with rights and the Constitution constitutes being ‘soft on terror’. In this case, should be expect another Kartar Singh or PUCL ?
No related posts.
Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.
Facebook comments:
Powered by Facebook Comments