Skip to main content

National Security Laws in India - By Isha

 National Security Laws in India – By Isha


Introduction

In India, the Parliament has time and again enacted a series of National and anti terror Laws such as: 

  • Preventive Detention Act

  • Maintenance of Internal Security Act (MISA)

  • Terrorism and Disruptive Activities Act ( TADA)

  • Prevention of Terrorism Act ( POTA)

  • National Security Act

  • National Investigation Agency Act

  • Armed forces ( special powers) Act ( AFSPA)

  • Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Amendment Act , 2019 (UAPA)

These all are enacted to uphold the Sovereignty, Security and Integrity of the nation. These laws are also known as exceptional laws and necessary evils. 


  1. Preventive Detention Act (1950-1969)

This law was brought into existence soon after the constitution came into force. Under this law, the Government was authorised to detain individuals upto 1 year without charge. The main objective of this act was to resist the communal violence and displacement faced by the nation during partition. This was a temporary act which lapsed in the year 1969.


  1. Armed Forces Special Powers Act, 1958 – till date

It was enacted to control the separatists movement in Nagaland. It gives special powers to the armed forces to maintain public order in a ‘disturbed area’. Under Section 3 of this act, the government has the power to declare an area as a ‘disturbed area’ and impose military rule. Under this act army has the authority to arrest any person without a warrant and also to prohibit a gathering of five or more persons in an area, can use force or even open fire after giving due warning if they feel a person is in contravention of the law.


  1. Maintenance of Internal Security Act ( 1971-77)

After two years of the removal of PDA Act came the MISA Act. It gave the same powers o to the government which were given under PDA but with a new name of MISA. The Act was majorly misused by Indira Gandhi Government to detain the political opponents, trade unions and civil societies that acted against the government.

Later with the fall of Indira Gandhi Government, MISA was repealed in 1977.


  1. National Security Act, 1980 – till date 

This Act is a mixture of PDA and MISA. Under this act, the government is authorised to detain or contain any person in order to prevent future crimes. The person can be confined for a period of 12 months which can also be extended if provided fresh evidence. The basic rights of legal aid and right to be informed are not  available to the person detained.

A recent incident in Indore where four persons were arrested on the instigation of local people for pelting stones on health workers were arrested under this Act. Therefore, in the present context, the usage of the act has widely increased beyond its applicability.


  1. Terrorism and Disruptive Activities Act ( 1987- 1995)

This act was enacted to control separatist activities and specially terrorist activities in Punjab.

This act overrides the provisions of CrPC and Constitution. It created new offences, increased the powers of police and reduced the safeguards of arrested person. It lapsed in the year 1995, due to a lot of misuse and drawbacks.


  1. Prevention of Terrorism Act ( 2002- 2004)

Soon after IC-814 (1999) Kandhar Hijack, terrorist attack on world trade centre in America on Sep 11 2001 and Parliament attack in 2001, due to these events there was an urgent need to strengthen the anti terror laws of India and so Prevention of Terrorism Act was passed in the year 2002. 

Under this act, a person can be detained for 180 days or 6 months. It has the same provisions as of TADA. Several allegations were made around that political parties were misusing the provisions of this Act for their political agenda.

Due to the extreme misuse of this Act, it was finally repealed in 2004.


  1. Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 – till date

Finally, the government gave the thought that only one Act should be strengthened than making any other law. When first enacted exclusively dealt with offences related to unlawful activities wherein government was empowered to declare certain associations as unlawful and certain activities as same which were disrupting the sovereignty of the nation and creating disaffection amongst the population.

The Act was amended several times like firstly in 2004, then in 2008, 2012, and the latest in 2019.


Latest Amendment for 2019: The Act altered Sec 35, 36, and provided power to the government to declare the individual as a terrorist under Schedule IV of the Act. It also provided power to DG of NIA for the seizure of property in sec 25 and investigation by the rank of an inspector under sec 43.


  1. National Investigation Agency Act (2008 & 2019 Amendment)

NIA bill was passed in 2008 soon after the Mumbai terror attack for creating a central agency probing into the matters of terror attack in the country.


A central agency created to prosecute offences disturbing the sovereignty, integrity and security of state also against atomic and nuclear facilities, then if found dealing in high-quality counterfeit Indian currency. It was created under National Investigation Agency Act, 2008. 


Jurisdiction of NIA: The officers of the central agency shall have the same power as that of police officers. The officers shall also have the power to investigate same offence even outside India in the same manner as that would have been done in India.  


 Recent Amendment: There has been addition of some offences into the schedule. Those are:-

  • Human trafficking

  • Offences related to counterfeit currency or banknotes

  • Manufacture or sale of prohibited arms

  • Cyber-terrorism, and

  • Offenses under the Explosive Substances Act, 1908


Conclusion

Lastly, after discussing all the security laws of India, much of the debate lies between striking a balance between state power to combat terrorism that is security and liberty. The lawyers, scholars, and judges should focus on having a balanced approach, but the task is difficult as the elements are civil liberties, human rights, and national security. And there lies no precise definition for each.





 
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Section 58B of The Advocates Act - Special provision relating to certain disciplinary proceedings

 Section 58B The Advocates Act Description (1) As from the 1st day of September, 1963, every proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate of a High Court shall, save as provided in the first proviso to sub-section (2), be disposed of by the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if the existing advocate had been enrolled as an advocate on its roll. (2) If immediately before the said date, there is any proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate pending before any High Court under the Indian Bar Councils Act, 1926 (38 of 1926), such proceeding shall stand transferred to the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if it were a proceeding pending before the corresponding Bar Council under clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 56: Provided that where in respect of any such proceeding the High Court has received the finding of a Tribunal constituted under section 11 of the Indian B
Post a Comment
Read more

Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of ClaimantCase Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant. TOLLEY Vs, J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement. Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be asked to resign from his respective club. Furthermore, there was evidence that the possible adverse effects of the caricature on the claimant’s reputation were brought to the defendants’ attention. The trial judge found that the caricature could have a defamatory meaning. The jury then found in favor of the claimant. Held The House of Lords held that in the circumstances of this case – as explained by the facts – the caricature was capable of constituting defamation. In other words, the publication could have the meaning alleged by the claimant. The Lords also ordered a new trial limited to the assessment of damages. NEWSTEAD V LANDON EXPRESS NEWSPAPER LTD, (1939) Facts: A newspaper published a defamatory article about Harold Newstead. However, another person with this name brought an action in libel. He claimed that the article had been misunderstood as leading to him. The defendant newspaper recognised that they published the article. Also, they denied that they had the intention of being defamatory of him. Consequently, the claimant argued that the newspaper was under a duty. The duty was to give a clear and complete description of the correct person. Moreover, the claimant argued that the defendants were in breach of the duty. Issues: The issue in Newstead v London Express Newspaper, was if the reasonable persons would have understood the words complained of to refer to the plaintiff. Held: The Court of Appeal stated that in accordance with the current law on libel, liability for libel does not depend on the intention of the defamer; but on the fact of the defamation. Accordingly, a reasonable man, in this case a newspaper publisher, must be aware of the possibility of individuals with the same name and must assume that the words published will be read by a reasonable man with reasonable care.

  Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant.  TOLLEY  Vs,  J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement.   Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be aske
1 comment
Read more

Rules as to delivery of goods

                             Rules as to delivery of goods Section 2(2) of Sale of Goods Act defines ‘delivery’ as a ‘voluntary transfer of possession from one person to another.’ Thus, if the transfer of goods is not voluntary and is taken by theft, by fraud, or by force, then there is no ‘delivery. Moreover, the ‘delivery’ should have the effect of putting the goods in possession of the buyer. The essence of the delivery is a voluntary transfer of possession of goods from one person to another. There is no delivery of goods where they are obtained at pistol point or theft. 1. Mode of Delivery: According to Section 33, delivery of goods sold may be made by doing anything which the parties agree shall be treated as delivery or which has the effect of putting the goods in the possession of the buyer or of any person authorized to hold them on his behalf. Delivery of goods may be actual, symbolic or constructive. 2. Expenses of Delivery: According to Section 36(5), unless otherwise agree
Post a Comment
Read more