A week after Parliament passed the National Investigation Agency (Amendment) Bill, the Lok Sabha gave its nod to the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Amendment (UAPA), Bill 2019. The UAPA Act currently allows the government to designate any organisation as “terrorist” if it believes that it is involved in terrorism. The amendments passed by the Lok Sabha last week seek to empower the Centre to designate individuals as terrorists. During the debate in the Lok Sabha, Home Minister Amit Shah deployed the national security argument. Banned outfits often change their names. “So, there’s a need for a provision to declare an individual as a terrorist,” he said. There can be little quarrel over the need to bolster national security. But there must be a distinction between an individual and an organisation, and it must be kept in mind that the Constitution guarantees the former the right to life and liberty.
The proposed amendments are also troubling in light of the changes made to the NIA law. The amended NIA law gives the agency the power to “investigate terror crimes relating to Indians and interests of India”. But the amendments do not define “interests of India”, just as the proposed amendments to the UAPA do not spell out who is a terrorist. They merely say that the Centre may designate a person or an outfit “as terrorist if it (he/she) commits or participates in acts of terrorism, prepares for terrorism, promote terrorism, or is otherwise involved in terrorism”. The vagueness at the heart of that formulation means that the Centre and investigative agencies have wide discretionary powers to decide what constitutes a “terrorist offence”. This is a recipe for misuse by governments which, arguably, may view critical voices as inimical to the “interests of India”.
During the debate on the UAPA amendments in the Lok Sabha, Home Minister Shah held out the assurance that the new provision will not be misused. But his references to “Urban Maoists” during the debate have raised fears that the government could use its power to tag a person as a “terrorist” to stifle dissent or to target people from specific communities. The new NIA law gives the agency powers to investigate crimes related to human trafficking, offences related to counterfeit currency, manufacture or sale of prohibited arms, cyber-terrorism and offences under the Explosive Substances Act. These functions were hitherto performed by the police of the state concerned.
The policing powers of states will be further curtailed if the amendments to the UAPA act are approved. For example, the provision to empower the head of the NIA to approve the forfeiture of properties of “those involved in terrorist activities” undermines the role of the Director General of Police in the states. In the Lok Sabha, the government used the weight of its numbers to ride roughshod over such concerns. But it would do well to rethink the issues pertaining to the rights of life and liberty, and to federalism, when the amendments to the UAPA come up for debate in the Rajya Sabha.
Q.1 Which of the following supports the view of the author in the above-mentioned paragraph?
a. It is highly likely that the new amendments to UAPA and NIA law will be misused to persecute Urban Naxals in the country, as pointed by Home Minister Amit Shah during the Lok Sabha debates,
b. The vagueness of the UAPA and NIA law gives wide discretionary powers to the state authorities to persecute an individual for a ‘terrorist offence’. The proposed law might have an adverse impact on the freedom of life and liberty and the federal structure of India.
c. The amendments to the UAPA though a little vague were required in order to strengthen national security and address the question of rising cross-border terrorism in the country.
d. It is justified to brand an organisation as a ‘terrorist organisation’ as it does not have the right to life and liberty but as individuals enjoy these rights, they should not be branded as ‘terrorists’ as per the provisions of the new law.
Ans: b
Q.2 As per the above passage, how can the new UAPA law be misused by the government in power against individual through designation method?
a. By labelling a person as a “terrorist” to curb criticism and dissent or to target people from specific communities.
b. By targeting person who are not approving of the government policies in political vendetta.
c. By bolstering and enhance national security of the country by keeping a tab on the individuals for any ‘terrorist offence’.
d. By undermining the federal structure of the country and limiting the role of the Director General of Police [DGP] in the states.
Ans: a
Q.3 Corollary to the amendments made to the UAPA, NIA law has also been amended. Which of the following is not a provision of the newly introduced NIA law?
a. It gives the agency the power to “investigate terror crimes relating to Indians and interests of India”.
b. It gives the agency giving arbitrary powers by not defining the term “interests of India” keeping the terminology vague and
c. It gives the agency powers to investigate crimes related to human trafficking, offences related to counterfeit currency, manufacture or sale of prohibited arms, cyber-terrorism and offences under the Explosive Substances Act.
d. It gives the agency the power to label an individual as ‘terrorist’ and persecute them for ‘terrorist offences’.
Ans: d
Q.4 As per the above passage, what did the Home Minister Amit Shah mean while referring to ‘Urban Maoist’?
a. Maoists not based out of the remote areas but operating from the urban regions in the country.
b. Urban population of the country who are expressing dissent against the policies of the government.
c. Individuals protecting the right to life and liberty as guaranteed by the Indian Constitution.
d. The Director General of Police in the states of India.
Ans: b
Q.5 The government of India have reasons to believe that Karan Rampal is a person with links to the terrorist organisation, dinbhar-e-taiba. The government want to designate him as terrorist. Decide the correct answer according to above passage. (This is before the UAPA amendment bill, 2019 passed).
a. Government has the power to declare him terrorist in the interest of National Security.
b. Government cannot designate him as terrorist as before the amendment of 2019, only organisations could be designated as terrorist.
c. Government has the power to declare him terrorist as the amendment allows the government to declare the individuals as terrorist.
d. None of the above.
Ans: b
