A modern state arms itself with more and more powers to counter the modern-day scourge of terrorism. Of course, it is not an ideal situation when citizens’ rights are abridged in the name of their own security and well-being. But when it comes to fighting terror the genuine fear is of a police state eroding common civil liberties without any recourse for redressal to the aggrieved citizens. It is in this context that we view the latest amendments passed by the Lok Sabha to the anti-terror law on Tuesday. The misgivings of the critics were genuine since the proposed changes in the existing law can be misused for extraneous factors. Without doubt the police and other anti-terrorist agencies need to be given a free hand in combating the menace, but there seems to be no safeguards should the same powers be exploited to harass individuals. The Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Amendment Bill, 2019, further empowers the National Investigation Agency to attach properties of suspected terrorists on its own without the prior permission of the relevant state government. The existing provision required the nod of the director general of the state police before the property of a terror suspect could be seized. Again, in an extraordinary move, the new provision would allow the NIA to designate individuals as terrorists with all the attendant penalties prescribed under the law. Hitherto only organizations could be deemed terrorists, and not individuals. Maybe in some situations the organization may not merit the terrorist tag while the impugned individual could in the eyes of the investigating agencies. Individuals blacklisted as terrorists would thus forfeit rights, benefits and protections flowing from citizenship. Another provision would allow lower ranked officers to undertake terror investigations.
The debate on the bill saw sharp divisions in the House, with the Opposition voicing concern that the proposed changes would not only cut out the state governments and thus whittle down further the federal content in the polity, but, more ominously, it could be exploited to target critics of the ruling party. Expectedly, Union Home Minister Amit Shah dismissed these fears as unfounded while stoutly defending the need to strengthen the investigating arm of the State to defend it against the ever-present threat of terrorism. He peppered his reply on the debate with phrases such as ‘urban naxals’ and ‘urban Maoists’. And he pushed the critics on the Opposition benches on the defensive, reminding them that the original law was framed by the Indira Gandhi Government back in 1967. Despite the solemn assurance by Shah against the misuse of the proposed changes in the anti-terror law, there can be no guarantee that it would not be misused---as similar laws, including the draconian Maintenance of Internal Security Act, again Indira Gandhi’s gift to the nation---was widely misused to silence her critics during the Emergency. A vigilant citizenry alone is the best safeguard against an over-bearing executive.
Now a ‘Boris Trump’ for Britain
Britain has its own Trump, albeit one who speaks and writes correct English. Boris Johnson, the former journalist dismissed twice for unethical practices, now tenants 10 Downing Street. For how long, it is hard to tell. One, because his majority is wafer-thin, two right now but it could be reduced to one after the by-election next week. Two, his stated goal to be out of the EU on or before 31st October may prove unattainable given the fissures in his own party and in the Commons as a whole. Besides, he has begun on an ominous note with a number of senior ministers in the Theresa May Government refusing to serve under him. Like the original Trump, Boris too conducts himself with a huge excess of bluff and bluster, like Donald he too seems to be unaware of ground realities. His speech after taking over as Prime Minister on Wednesday contained tall promises which on the face of it seemed impossible to achieve, particularly for a government which is dependent on outside support and is riven by sharp divisions.
Brexit is an immediate challenge and this could well end his prime ministerial stint sooner than he or anyone else imagines. For, the EU is unready to reopen the deal it gave May. There is no question of removing the Irish backstop. Full Stop. And if it stays as in the original, Boris will fall in Parliament. And the threat of reneging on payment of $ 39 billion to EU as the leaving fees does not behove licit states. Twenty-thousand new police jobs, twenty new hospitals, brand new trade treaties with other nations, etc. sound good on paper, but Boris would soon realize that reality can bite and render him redundant. His inclusion of three ministers of Indian origin may be a nod to a multi-ethnic British society, but someone like Boris ought to come to terms with the fast diminishing role and influence of the UK. And instead of big words, surmount the first challenge of a negotiated Brexit; a no-deal Brexit will be an all-round disaster for Britain.
- S Sadanand
