Prevention of Terrorism Act, 2002

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
"POTA" redirects here. For other uses, see POTA (disambiguation).
Prevention of Terrorism Act, 2002
Emblem of India.svg
An Act to make provisions for the prevention of, and for Sealing with,the terrorist activities and for matters connected therewith.[1]
Citation Act No. 15 of 2002[1]
Enacted by Parliament of India
Date enacted 28 March 2002[1]
Amendments
Prevention of Terrorism (Amendment) Act, 2003 (Act No. 4 of 2004)[2]
Repealing legislation
Prevention of Terrorism (Repeal) Act, 2004 (Act No. 26 of 2004)[3]

The Prevention of Terrorism Act, 2002 (POTA) was an Act passed by the Parliament of India in 2002, with the aim of strengthening anti-terrorism operations. The act was enacted due to several terrorist attacks that took place in India especially the attack on the Parliament. The act replaced the Prevention of Terrorism Ordinance (POTO) of 2001 and the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act (TADA) (1985–95), and was supported by the governing National Democratic Alliance. The act was repealed in 2004 by the United Progressive Alliance coalition.

The bill was defeated in the Rajya Sabha (the upper house) by a 113-98 vote,[4] but was passed in a joint session, as the Lok Sabha (lower house) has more seats. It was only the third time that a bill was passed by a joint session of both houses of parliament.[5][6][7]

The act defined what a "terrorist act" and a "terrorist" is, and granted special powers to the investigating authorities described under the act. To ensure certain powers were not misused and human rights violations would not take place, specific safeguards were built into the act.[8]

Provisions similar to TADA[edit]

Analogous to the provisions contained in TADA, the law provided that a suspect could be detained for up to 180 days without the filing of chargesheet in court. It also allowed law enforcement agencies to withhold the identities of witnesses, and to treat a confession made to the police as an admission of guilt. Under regular Indian law, a person can deny such confessions in court, but not under POTA.[9] However the law did have some safeguards. A bail ruling or verdict from a Special Court constituted under this act could be appealed to a bench of two judges of the High Court of the same jurisdiction. Also unlike TADA, it had no provision to allow preventive detention.[10]

Review committee[edit]

The provisions in the act mentioned the possibility of both state and central review committees, but offered few details as to their formation or use. As the act began to be widely misused by the state governments, the central government finally established a review committee to hear individual cases related to this act. At first, the committee functioned in a purely advisory capacity.

In December 2003, by an overwhelming majority, India’s legislature amended the act with an ordinance designed to expand the scope of judicial review.[10] The new ordinance gave review commissions the authority to review the prima facie case of an “aggrieved person” and issue orders binding on the state government and police. Though the amendment was an improvement on the purely advisory capacity of the initial review committee because it enhanced the power of judicial review, the central review committee remained largely impotent, as it could not initiate an investigation absent an initial complaint and lacked clearly delineated investigatory powers. Moreover, the review committee’s resources were limited, and it operated under no regulated time-frame. Without sufficient autonomy, resources, or guidelines, the committee was an illusory safeguard.[10]

Given the review committee’s limitations, only the grievances of those persons with political connections to the central government were likely to be heard. Further, even with political pressure from the central government and a favorable advisory opinion by the review committee, Tamil Nadu detained Vaiko for over four months without charge, and an additional fourteen months after charging him before granting bail.

Impact and repeal[edit]

Once the Act became law, many reports surfaced of the law being grossly abused.[11] POTA was arbitrarily used to crack down political opponents. Only four months after its enactment, state law enforcement officers had arrested 250 people nationwide under the Act, and the number was steadily increasing. A mere eight months later, seven states applying POTA had arrested over 940 people, at least 560 of whom were languishing in jail. Several prominent persons like Vaiko were arrested under the act.[12]

On October 7, 2004, the Union Cabinet under UPA government approved the repeal of the act.[13] The act was repealed by passing Prevention of Terrorism (Repeal) Act, 2004. NDA and other parties condemned this act of publicity. NDA asked UPA to introduce the Act again, but Congress criticized it and did not pass the Act.[14]

Prominent POTA cases[edit]

See also[edit]

References[edit]

  1. ^ a b c "POTA 2002 - long title". indiacode.nic.in. Retrieved 31 July 2012. 
  2. ^ "POTA (amendment) act 2003". indiacode.nic.in. Retrieved 31 July 2012. 
  3. ^ "POTA (amendment) act 2003". indiacode.nic.in. Retrieved 31 July 2012. 
  4. ^ "It's Not POTA. Yet". OutlookIndia.com. 21 March 2002. Retrieved 28 July 2010. 
  5. ^ "POT Bill passed by joint session of Parliament". Rediff.com. March 26, 2002. Retrieved 31 July 2012. 
  6. ^ "President summons joint sitting of Parliament". The Economic Times. PTI. Mar 22, 2002. Archived from the original on 31 July 2012. Retrieved 31 July 2012. 
  7. ^ "782 MPs await novel joint session". The Economic Times. TNN. Mar 23, 2002. Retrieved 31 July 2012. 
  8. ^ Press Information Bureau Prevention of Terrorism Act, 2002 Retrieved on June 30, 2008
  9. ^ Rediff.com Its goodbye to POTA Retrieved on July 10, 2007
  10. ^ a b c http://www.bc.edu/dam/files/schools/law/lawreviews/journals/bctwj/25_1/09_FMS.htm
  11. ^ Kalhan, Anil et al. (2006). Colonial Continuities: Human Rights, Antiterrorism, and Security Laws in India. 20 Colum. J. Asian L. 93. Retrieved 2009-03-24. 
  12. ^ a b "SP condemns Vaiko's arrest under Pota". The Times Of India. July 13, 2002. 
  13. ^ Asian Center for the Progress of Peoples Appeal Updates Retrieved July 9, 2007
  14. ^ "UPA faulted by repealing POTA". Times of India. Retrieved 19 June 2013. 
  15. ^ http://www.rediff.com/news/2002/jul/11vaiko7.htm
  16. ^ Frontline Targeting Geelani Retrieved on July 7, 2007
  17. ^ http://www.indianexpress.com/oldStory/4118/
  18. ^ http://www.outlookindia.com/article.aspx?215989
  19. ^ "BJP demands revocation of Pota on Raghuraj Singh". The Times Of India. January 28, 2003. 
  20. ^ http://www.rediff.com/news/2003/jan/25up.htm

External links[edit]