Skip to main content

Does democratic India need more draconian laws than the ones under the British rule?

By Prabhakar Sinha*
Democratic India has far more draconian laws than the India under the British imperial rule. In fact, the Rowlatt Act whose opposition led to the massacre of more than a thousand men, women and children at the Jallianwala Bag is very mild and liberal compared to the Prevention of Terrorism Act, (POTA), 2002, Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act (TADA), 1985, Maintenance of Internal Security Act (MISA), 1971, Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), 1967, Armed Forces (Special Powers) Acts (AFSPA), 1958, and numerous other laws enacted by the Union and the State governments after Independence.
Under the Rowlatt Act thousands could not have been arrested indiscriminately as is done under the dreaded draconian laws enacted in the Republic of India. When a democratic government needs draconian laws, it means that it has ceased to be a government for the people and is engaged in serving a handful at the cost of the multitude leading to the need of an arsenal of draconian laws to suppress the protesting masses.
Would the people create such a situation for a government which serves them well as to warrant enactment of draconian laws for their own suppression? Such a course would be illogical and irrational. If there is a need for ruthless laws in our country, there has to be a reason.
The fact is that successive governments after Independence have been shamelessly violating the letter and spirit of the constitution and betraying the people to serve the rich causing anger and resentment. To take only a few examples, the constitution enjoins the State to 'minimise the inequalities in income' and 'eliminate the inequality of status, opportunity and facility' but the rulers have been maximising them.
The constitution enjoins the State to prevent concentration of wealth and the means of production into a few hands, but the rulers have been doing the opposite and have created a class of the rich and super rich. The constitution mandates the State to utilise the resources of the nation for the community, but the same is being gifted to the handful of the rich to make them richer.
The rich fund all the political parties and finance their leaders, and they all return the favour by employing the power of the State and resources of the nation to serve the interest of their benefactors at the cost of the people. They have reduced our democracy to a plutocracy (the rule of the rich) with the facade of democracy.
It is this plutocracy, which impels the government of the day to fill its arsenal with draconian laws to suppress the masses clamouring for the fulfilment of the dream which the politicians have sold them.
The people are helpless in forcing the government to implement the provisions in the constitution (mentioned above) because they have been made non-justiciable i.e. the courts cannot direct the State to implement them. All the provisions dealing with the welfare of the people have been placed in Part IV of the Constitution, which are non-justiciable.
Thus the people have been made helpless spectators of the usurpation of their rights and their future while the usurpers have been vesting themselves with ferocious laws to suppress them if they raise their voice against their betrayal.
Ours is a government of the people and by the people because it is elected by the people, but is not a government for the people because it serves a handful instead of the general public. It offers bouquet to its paymasters and lathis, bullets and prison to the rest. The draconian laws are needed to shut us in the prisons and ask us to shut up.
---
*Former national president, People’s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL). Source: PUCL Bulletin, March 2019

Comments

TRENDING

Rushdie, Pamuk, 260 writers tell Modi: Aatish episode casts chill on public discourse

Counterview Desk
As many as 260 writers, journalists, artists, academics and activists across the world, including Salman Rushdie, British Indian novelist, Orhan Pamuk, Turkish novelist and recipient of the 2006 Nobel Prize in literature, and Margaret Atwood, Canadian poet and novelist, have called upon Prime Minister Narendra Modi to review the decision to strip British Indian writer Aatish Taseer of his overseas Indian citizenship.

Church in India 'seems to have lost' moral compass of unequivocal support to the poor

By Fr Cedric Prakash SJ*
In 2017, Pope Francis dedicated a special day, to be observed by the Universal Church, every year, as the ‘World Day of the Poor’. This year it will be observed on November 17 on the theme ‘The hope of the poor shall not perish for ever’; in a message for the day Pope Francis says:

Visually challenged lady seeks appointment with Gujarat CM, is 'unofficially' detained

By Pankti Jog*
It was a usual noon of November 10. I got a phone call on our Right to Information (RTI) helpline No 9924085000 from Ranjanben of Khambhat, narrating her “disgraceful” experience after she had requested for an appointment with Gujarat chief minister Vijay Rupani. She wanted to meet Rupani, on tour of the Khambhat area in Central Gujarat as part of his Janvikas Jumbesh (Campaign for Development).

There may have been Buddhist stupa at Babri site during Gupta period: Archeologist

By Rajiv Shah
A top-notch archeologist, Prof Supriya Varma, who served as an observer during the excavation of the Babri Masjid site in early 2000s along with another archeologist, Jaya Menon, has controversially stated that not only was there "no temple under the Babri Masjid”, if one goes “beyond” the 12th century to 4th to 6th century, i.e. the Gupta period, “there seems to be a Buddhist stupa.”

Gujarat refusal to observe Maulana Azad's birthday as Education Day 'discriminatory'

By Our Representative
The Gujarat government decision not to celebrate the National Education Day on !monday has gone controversial. Civil society organizations have particularly wondered whether the state government is shying away from the occasion, especially against the backdrop of "deteriorating" level of education in Gujarat.

VHP doesn't represent all Hindus, Sunni Waqf Board all Muslims: NAPM on SC ruling

Counterview Desk
India's top civil rights network, National Alliance of People’s Movements (NAPM), even as describing the Supreme Court's Ayodhya judgement unjust, has said, it is an "assault on the secular fabric of the Constitution". In a statement signed by top social workers and activists, NAPM said, "The judgement conveys an impression to Muslims that, despite being equal citizens of the country, their rights are not equal before the law."

Violent 'Ajodhya' campaign in 1840s after British captured Kabul, destroyed Jama Masjid

Counterview Desk  Irfan Ahmad, professor at the Max Planck Institute for the Study of Religious and Ethnic Diversity, Göttingen, Germany, and author of “Islamism and Democracy in India” (Princeton University Press, 2009), short-listed for the 2011 International Convention of Asian Scholars Book Prize for the best study in Social Sciences, in his "initial thoughts" on the Supreme Court judgment on the Babri-Jam Janmaboomi dispute has said, while order was “lawful”, it was also “awful.”