Skip to main content

Notify law to monitor 'brazen abuse' of preventive detentions, demand ex-babus

Counterview Desk 

The Constitutional Conduct Group (CCG), made up of India's former civil servants*, has asked Union Minister of Law and Justice Kiren Rijiju to notify Section 3 of the Constitution (44th Amendment) Act, passed way back in 1978 "to provide for impartial and independent advisory board to examine the justification for preventive detention."
Regretting that the amendment has not been effected even 43 years after it was passed Paliament, CCG's open letter to the minister said, such an advisory board requires to be appointed in accordance with the recommendation of the Chief Justice of the High Court, is to be headed by a sitting judge of that High Court, with at least two serving/former judges of any High Court as members of the Board.
"The unconscionable delay of 43 years in the issue of this notification has resulted in a brazen abuse of preventive detention laws in gross violation of human rights and a progressive erosion of our cherished democratic values", the letter states.

Text:

We are a group of former civil servants of the All India and Central Services who have worked with the Central and State Governments in the course of our careers. As a group, we have no affiliation with any political party but believe in impartiality, neutrality and commitment to the Constitution of India.
You would be aware that Art. 22(4) of the Constitution of India was amended by the Constitution (Forty Fourth Amendment) Act, 1978. S. 3 of this amendment Act provides that the Advisory Board, to be constituted for examining the justification for preventive detention under this Article, is to be appointed in accordance with the recommendation of the Chief Justice of the High Court; it is to be headed by a sitting judge of that High Court and have at least two serving/former judges of any High Court as members of the Board.
The said S. 3 also deleted Art 22(7)(a) of the Constitution, thereby deleting the provision authorizing preventive detention without obtaining the opinion of an Advisory Board.
These amendments were meant to curtail the arbitrary power of governments to appoint on the Advisory Board any person qualified to be a judge of a High Court, and to ensure that no preventive detentions could be made, or continued, without obtaining the opinion of the Advisory Board within 2 months of the detention. These provisions have yet to come into force since a notification to give effect to S. 3 of the 44th Constitutional Amendment has not been issued.
At present, any advocate who is qualified to be a judge of a High Court, can be appointed to the Advisory Board. In effect, any advocate with ten years or more of practice can sit on an Advisory Board. This provision is, thus, vulnerable to abuse by governments which, instead of appointing neutral, independent members to the Board, may appoint persons of their choice, including those owing allegiance to the political party in power.
A look at the Objects and Reasons of the Constitution (Forty Fourth Amendment) Act, 1978 explains why Parliament, soon after the experience of the Emergency of 1975-77, considered it necessary to check arbitrary preventive detentions. Para 1 of the Objects and Reasons is cited below:
“Recent experience has shown that the fundamental rights, including those of life and liberty, granted to citizens by the Constitution are capable of being taken away by a transient majority. It is, therefore, necessary to provide adequate safeguards against the recurrence of such a contingency in the future and to ensure to the people themselves an effective voice in determining the form of government under which they are to live. This is one of the primary objects of this Bill.”
Successive Union Governments have, however, failed to notify any date for the coming into force of this Constitutional Amendment that was passed by Parliament as far back as 1978. It is not open to the Government of India to sit in judgment over the wisdom of Parliament, which was convinced of the necessity of amending Clause (4)(a) and deleting Clause (7)(a) of Article 22 through the Constitution (Forty Fourth Amendment) Act, 1978.
The provision empowering the Government of India to notify the dates for the coming into force of different provisions of the Constitution (Forty Fourth Amendment) Act was intended to give the government some flexibility in this regard. It will be a travesty if this provision is conveniently used by the government to negate the legislative intent by refusing to notify the date of coming into effect of the Constitution (Forty Fourth Amendment) Act. The unconscionable delay of 43 years in the issue of this notification has resulted in a brazen abuse of preventive detention laws in gross violation of human rights and a progressive erosion of our cherished democratic values.
We, therefore, urge the Government of India to forthwith notify a date for the coming into force of S. 3 of the Constitution (Forty Fourth Amendment) Act, 1978.
Satyamev Jayate
---
Click here for signatories

Comments

TRENDING

A comrade in culture and controversy: Yao Wenyuan’s revolutionary legacy

By Harsh Thakor*  This year marks two important anniversaries in Chinese revolutionary history—the 20th death anniversary of Yao Wenyuan, and the 50th anniversary of his seminal essay "On the Social Basis of the Lin Biao Anti-Party Clique". These milestones invite reflection on the man whose pen ignited the first sparks of the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution and whose sharp ideological interventions left an indelible imprint on the political and cultural landscape of socialist China.

Ahmedabad's Sabarmati riverfront under scrutiny after Subhash Bridge damage

By Rosamma Thomas*  Large cracks have appeared on Subhash Bridge across the Sabarmati in Ahmedabad, close to the Gandhi Ashram . Built in 1973, this bridge, named after Subhash Chandra Bose , connects the eastern and western parts of the city and is located close to major commercial areas. The four-lane bridge has sidewalks for pedestrians, and is vital for access to Ashram Road , Ellis Bridge , Gandhinagar and the Sabarmati Railway Station .

The Vande Mataram debate and the politics of manufactured controversy

By Vidya Bhushan Rawat*  The recent Vande Mataram debate in Parliament was never meant to foster genuine dialogue. Each political party spoke past the other, addressing its own constituency, ensuring that clips went viral rather than contributing to meaningful deliberation. The objective was clear: to construct a Hindutva narrative ahead of the Bengal elections. Predictably, the Lok Sabha will likely expunge the opposition’s “controversial” remarks while retaining blatant inaccuracies voiced by ministers and ruling-party members. The BJP has mastered the art of inserting distortions into parliamentary records to provide them with a veneer of historical legitimacy.

No action yet on complaint over assault on lawyer during Tirunelveli public hearing

By A Representative   A day after a detailed complaint was filed seeking disciplinary action against ten lawyers in Tirunelveli for allegedly assaulting human rights lawyer Dr. V. Suresh, no action has yet been taken by the Bar Council of Tamil Nadu and Puducherry, according to the People’s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL).

Farewell to Robin Smith, England’s Lionhearted Warrior Against Pace

By Harsh Thakor*  Robin Smith, who has died at the age of 62, was among the most adept and convincing players of fast bowling during an era when English cricket was in decline and pace bowling was at its most lethal. Unwavering against the tormenting West Indies pace attack or the relentless Australians, Smith epitomised courage and stroke-making prowess. His trademark shot, an immensely powerful square cut, made him a scourge of opponents. Wearing a blue England helmet without a visor or grille, he relished pulling, hooking and cutting the quicks. 

Latur’s quiet rebel: Dr Suryanarayan Ransubhe and his war on Manuvad

By Ravi Ranjan*  In an India still fractured by caste, religion, and language, where narrow loyalties repeatedly threaten to tear the nation apart, Rammanohar Lohia once observed that the true leader of the bahujans is one under whose banner even non-bahujans feel proud to march. The remark applies far beyond politics. In the literary-cultural and social spheres as well, only a person armed with unflinching historical consciousness and the moral courage to refuse every form of personality worship—including worship of oneself—can hope to touch the weak pulse of the age and speak its bitter truths without fear or favour. 

Proposals for Babri Masjid, Ram Temple spark fears of polarisation before West Bengal polls

By A Representative   A political debate has emerged in West Bengal following recent announcements about plans for new religious structures in Murshidabad district, including a proposed mosque to be named Babri Masjid and a separate announcement by a BJP leader regarding the construction of a Ram temple in another location within Behrampur.

Differences in 2002 and 2025 SIR revision procedures spark alarm in Gujarat

By A Representative   Civil rights groups and electoral reform activists have raised serious concerns over the ongoing Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in Gujarat and 11 other states, alleging that the newly enforced requirements could lead to large-scale deletion of legitimate voters, particularly those unable to furnish documentation linking them to the 2002 electoral list.

Myanmar prepares for elections widely seen as a junta-controlled exercise

By Nava Thakuria*  Trouble-torn Myanmar (also known as Burma or Brahmadesh) is preparing for three-phase national elections starting on 28 December 2025, with results expected in January 2026. Several political parties—primarily proxies of the Burmese military junta—are participating, while Aung San Suu Kyi’s National League for Democracy (NLD) remains banned. Observers expect a one-sided contest where junta-backed candidates are likely to dominate.