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

Academics urge Azim Premji University to drop FIR against Student Reading Circle

By A Representative A group of academics and civil society members has issued an open letter to the leadership of Azim Premji University expressing concern over the filing of a police complaint that led to an FIR against a student-run reading circle following a recent incident of violence on campus. The signatories state that they hold the university in high regard for its commitment to constitutional values, critical inquiry and ethical public engagement, and argue that it is precisely because of this reputation that the present development is troubling.

'Policy long overdue': Coalition of 29 experts tells JP Nadda to act on SC warning label order

By A Representative In a significant development for public health, the Supreme Court of India has directed the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI) to seriously consider implementing mandatory front-of-pack warning labels on pre-packaged food products. The order, passed by a bench of Justices J.B. Pardiwala and K.V. Viswanathan on February 10, 2026, comes as the Court expressed dissatisfaction with the regulatory body's progress on the issue.

Vaccination vs screening: Policy questions raised on cervical cancer strategy

By A Representative A public policy expert has written to Union Health Minister J. P. Nadda raising a series of concerns regarding the national Human Papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination campaign launched on February 28 for 14-year-old girls.

UAPA action against Telangana activist: Criminalising legitimate democratic activity?

By A Representative The National Investigation Agency's Hyderabad branch has issued notices to more than ten individuals in Telangana in connection with FIR No. RC-04/2025. Those served include activists, former student leaders, civil rights advocates, poets, writers, retired schoolteachers, and local leaders associated with the Communist Party of India (CPI) and the Indian National Congress.

The new anti-national certificate: If Arundhati Roy is the benchmark, count me in

By Dr. Mansee Bal Bhargava* Dear MANIT Alumni Network Committee, “Are you anti-national?” I encountered this fascinating—some may say intimidating—question from an elderly woman I barely know, an alumna of Maulana Azad College of Technology (MACT, now Maulana Azad National Institute of Technology - MANIT), Bhopal, and apparently one of the founders of the MACT (now MANIT) Alumni Network. The authority with which she posed the question was striking. “How much anti-national are you? What have you done for the Alumni Network Committee to identify you as anti-national?” When I asked what “anti-national” meant to her and who was busy certifying me as such, the response came in counter-questions.

Minority concerns mount: RTI reveals govt funded Delhi religious meet in December

By Syed Ali Mujtaba* Indian Muslims have expressed deep concern over what they describe as rising hate speech and hostility against their community under the BJP-led government in India. A recent flashpoint was the event organised by Sanatan Sanstha titled “Sanatan Rashtra Shankhnad Mahotsav” in New Delhi on 13–14 December 2025.

Development vs community: New coal politics and old conflicts in Madhya Pradesh

By Deepmala Patel* The Singrauli region of Madhya Pradesh, often described as “India’s energy capital,” has for decades been a hub of coal mining and thermal power generation. Today, the Dhirouli coal mine project in this district has triggered widespread protests among local communities. In recent years, the project has generated intense controversy, public opposition, and significant legal and social questions. This is not merely a dispute over one mine; it raises a larger question—who pays the price for energy development? Large corporate beneficiaries or the survival of local communities?

From neglect to progress: The story of Ranavara’s community-led development

By Bharat Dogra Visitors to Ranavara, a remote village in Kherwara block of Udaipur district, are often surprised by its multi-dimensional progress. The village today is known for its impressive school building, regenerated pastures, expanded tree cover, and extensive water conservation and supply works. These achievements are the outcome of sustained community efforts over several years, demonstrating how small, consistent initiatives can lead to significant change.

Buddhist shrines were 'massively destroyed' by Brahmanical rulers: Historian DN Jha

Nalanda mahavihara By Rajiv Shah Prominent historian DN Jha, an expert in India's ancient and medieval past, in his new book , "Against the Grain: Notes on Identity, Intolerance and History", in a sharp critique of "Hindutva ideologues", who look at the ancient period of Indian history as "a golden age marked by social harmony, devoid of any religious violence", has said, "Demolition and desecration of rival religious establishments, and the appropriation of their idols, was not uncommon in India before the advent of Islam".

Search This Blog