Sign In
Learn bits
Polity & Governance
Mahesh

16/05/24 06:14 AM IST

Provisions of UAPA

In News
  • In invalidating NewsClick editor Prabir Purkayastha’s arrest, the Supreme Court recently extended a key constitutional procedural shield against arrest to the stringent anti-terror legislation.
Provisions of UAPA
  • It was first enacted in 1967 to deal with secessionist movements and anti-national activities.
  • It was amended several times, most recently in 2019, to include provisions related to terrorist financing, cyber-terrorism, individual designation, and seizure of property.
  • It empowers the National Investigation Agency (NIA) to investigate and prosecute cases under UAPA across the country.
  • It provides for the death penalty and life imprisonment as the highest punishments for terrorist acts.
  • It allows for the detention of suspects without charge or trial for up to 180 days, and for the denial of bail to the accused unless the court is satisfied that they are not guilty.
  • It defines unlawful activity as any action that supports or incites the cession or secession of any part of India, or that questions or disrespects its sovereignty and territorial integrity.
  • It defines terrorism as any act that causes or intends to cause death or injury to any person, or damage or destruction to any property, or that threatens the unity, security or economic stability of India or any other country.
Concerns
  • The law violates the fundamental rights of freedom of expression, assembly, and association guaranteed by the Constitution. It criminalizes dissent and protest, and can be used to target activists, journalists, students, and minorities who raise their voice against the government.
  • The law lacks adequate safeguards and accountability mechanisms to prevent misuse and abuse of power by the authorities.
  • It gives the central government the sole discretion to designate individuals as terrorists, without any judicial review or opportunity for appeal. It also shifts the burden of proof to the accused, making it difficult to obtain bail or fair trial.
  • Furthermore, the Supreme Court in NIA v. Zahoor Ahmad Shah Watali (2020) ruled that it is not permissible for courts to even engage in a detailed analysis of prosecution case while considering bail under UAPA and to weigh whether evidence adduced (cited as evidence) by prosecution is even sufficient or not.
  • The law is against the federal structure of the country, as it encroaches upon the powers of the state governments to maintain law and order and investigate crimes. It also undermines the autonomy and independence of the NIA, which is supposed to be a central agency for counter-terrorism.
  • The law has a low conviction rate, indicating that it is ineffective and arbitrary in achieving its objectives.
  • According to the Union Home Ministry, only 2.2% of the cases registered under the UAPA between 2016 and 2019 ended in conviction by courts. This shows that the law is used to harass and intimidate innocent people, rather than to curb terrorism.
Source- Indian Express

More Related Current Affairs View All

05 Mar

First-ever comprehensive survey of India’s river dolphins

'Prime Minister Narendra Modi released the results of the first-ever comprehensive population estimation of riverine dolphins – Gangetic and Indus dolphins – done in In

Read More

05 Mar

Arresting women at night

'The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court in Deepa versus S. Vijayalakshmi and Others ruled that the legal provision in the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, which

Read More

05 Mar

Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023

'The Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) looking to wrap up public consultations on the draft Rules for the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 by Mar

Read More

India’s First Ai-Driven Magazine Generator

Generate Your Custom Current Affairs Magazine using our AI in just 3 steps