|
When Human Right activists say scrap POTA, they are not defending
violence of anybody. We are being realistic, we are saying that you
are faced with political situation. A political situation or political
aspiration or political goal, which are various historical, social reasons has
taken a militant form or taken into violent form. Some people believe that
violence was unavoidable and they have taken weapons. Some other believes, we
had other options, but has chosen weapons. Some people believe it is very bad.
But it is bitter happen. Once it is happened, how does the society respond? How
does the administration respond? How does State respond? We would insist the
society, administration and the State shall recognise, that there is a social
basis, social routes, there are political aims, political objects, political
characters to the phenomena, which are called terrorism, extremism, whatever
your want to call it. Certainly take necessary police or legal action, acts of
violence, but don't treat the whole it, merely as outbreak of violence. Take
action through the police, through the criminal law to fair and just criminal
law, through human criminal law, thought accepted method of policing against
acts of violence. But don't treat the whole, only any out break of violence, see
it as a social phenomena, which the administration and state refuse to do,
everywhere in the country. And POTA is one of the consequences. What is POTA
defending a new offence, which is not defend in Indian Penal Code? No. Indian
Penal Code was written about 140 years ago. They have listed every possible
offence a human being can commit. Human Beings have not invented a new offence,
which has not imagined, when IPC has written. So what has POTA do?
POTA does not recognises a new offence. It does two things. The procedure for
prosecuting offences, which are old offences. The procedure it make unjust,
unfair and unreasonable. Then one thing it does. The other and equally thing it
does is that in the name of containing violence, it tries to contain opinions.
In the name of preventing violence, it tries to prevent the spirit of political
opinions. That is objectable. Can a statute be made or can a law be made,
which in the name of handling crime, will suppress political opinion. Can a
democratic country, can a democratic society, can a society with has to be a
democracy, which to some extend, some justification a lot of bombard, claims to
be a democracy? Tolerate such as law like POTA? This is the question before us?
The first person arrested under POTA in India was Mr Yassin Mallik of Kashmir,
leader of Jammu & Kashmir Liberation Front [JKLF], who has been proclaimed
himself as a Gandhian. He demands that Kashmiries, has right to separate from
India, if that is the wish of the majority of his people. It is a political
opinion. But for this, some body can jail under POTA? He has been arrested under
POTA.
|
