Unlawful Activities(Prevention)Act 1967- Validity Of UAPA is not Restricted Only To Terrorist Activities.

History of UAPA Act.?

The Unlawful Activities Prevention Act 1967 is a law aimed to prevention of unlawful activities? associations in India. It’s main objective was to give power to central institutions for dealing? with activities directed against the sovereignty and integrity of India. The most recent ?amendment of the law, the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Amendment Act, 2019 (UAPA ?2019) has made it possible for the Union Government to designate individuals as terrorists with ?due process of law. UAPA is also known as the Anti-terror law.?

Why it was brought??

Central government was considering a stringent law against calls for successions in the mid 1960s. In 1967, the Naxalbari incident imparted a sense of urgency and Unlawful? Activities(Prevention)Act was passed in December 1967.Earlier 1967, the President of India had? promulgated the Unlawful Activities(Prevention) Ordinance. Under article 123 of Indian? Constitution the President has power at any time, except when both Houses of Parliament are in ?session, the President is satisfied that circumstances exist which render it necessary for him to ?take immediate action, he may promulgate such Ordinances as the circumstances appear to him ?to require.?

Wider Scope of UAPA Act.?

The scope of UAPA 1967 has widened as Unlawful Activities(Prevention)Act has been amended ?multiples times-2004,2008,2012 and 2019.?

Initially, the act provided by declaring an association or a body of individuals “Unlawful” if they ?indulged in any activity which threatened country sovereignty and integrity of India. In 2004 ?amendment, many provisions of POTA were added to UAPA after POTA was repealed in 2002. In 2008 after Mumbai attack it was further strengthened. In 2012, UAPA was brought in line ?with various requirements of the Financial Action Task Force(FATF). The ban on organization ?was extended to 5 years from earlier 2 years ban.?

In 2019, UAPA was further amended to empower the government to designated individuals as a ?terrorist. The Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Amendment Bill, 2019 was introduced in Lok? Sabha by the Minister of Home Affairs, Amit Shah, on 8 July 2019. The Bill amends the ?Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967. The Act provides special procedures to deal with ?terrorist activities, among other things. The act was passed in the Lok Sabha on 24 July and ?Rajya Sabha on 2 August. It received the assent of the president on 8 August 2019.

Why it was stringent??

Under UAPA, a remand order can be for 30 days instead of the usual 15 days. Under this act the ?maximum period of judicial custody before the filing the chargesheet was extended from 90 days ?to 180 days. Under UAPA, the highest punishment was Death penalty and rigorous life ?punishment. Under this act the INDIAN as well as FOREIGN NATIONALS can be charged.?

UAPA Criticisms. ?

The biggest problem with this act is Section 43D(5), under this section, bail cannot be granted to ?a suspect if the court is of the opinion that there are reasonable grounds to believe that the charge ?are prima facie true.?

The hon’ble Supreme Court said in case NIA V. Zahoor Ahmed Shah Watali reiterated that in ?considering bail application under this section of UAPA, that court may presume every ?allegation made in the FIR to be correct. Bail can be obtained only if the accused produced ?materials to contradict the prosecution.?

Simply put, the burden rests on the accused to disapprove the allegations, which is virtually ?impossible in most cases. Many human rights defenders feel that this provision is draconian. It ?makes it impossible for anyone to obtain bail until the completion of the trail.?

Recently Delhi High Court calls out the misuse of UAPA, raises bar for state to slap terror tag. ?The hon’ble Delhi High Court has highlighted that courts must be careful in employing the ?definitional words in section 15 of UAPA Act in literal sense, protest against government and ?parliament are legitimate.?

Government Bans PFI Under UAPA Act-1967.?

Recently GOI hammered the social group namely Popular Front Of India under UAPA Act. In ?official order through Ministry of Home Affairs said the Central Government regards to ?circumstances is of firm opinions that is necessary to declare the PFI and it’s associates or ?affiliates or fronts as an unlawful organization with immediate effects. In the proviso to sub section (3) of section 3 of this act the GOI bans the PFI through official gazette.?

Petitions Challenging the UAPA’s Constitutionality:?

A Public Interest Litigation (PIL) was filed by Sajal Awasthi against UAPA, 2019 in the ?Supreme Court to declare it unconstitutional as it violates basic fundamental rights. He said it ?indirectly curtailed the right to dissent and was against Articles 14 (right to equality),19 (right to ?freedom of speech and expression) and 21 (right to life) of the Indian Constitutions . ?Furthermore, it does not provide any opportunities to the individual termed as a terrorist to ?justify his case before the arrest. The petitioner also said that

“Right to Reputation is an intrinsic part of fundamental right to life with dignity under Article 21 ?of the Constitution of India and terming/tagging an individual as ‘terrorist’ even before the ?commencement of trial or any application of the judicial mind over it, does not adhere to ?procedure established by law.”?

Conclusion:?

As the conclusion such acts violates the fundamental rights of an individuals and for an ?organization too. Governments used such acts for their beneficiary, past few years the numbers of registered cases increase against journalist, politicians and social workers. The government ?has time and again used draconian laws such as sedition and criminal defamation laws to silence ?dissent. These laws are vaguely worded and overly broad and have been used as political tools ?against critics showing a movement towards “thought-crimes.” The legislature in realizing the ?purpose of this Act has eroded human rights. There are several issues with this acts under section ?25 and 43 of this act, as its against the fundamental rights under Indian constitution of India. The? Act mainly criminalizes acts on the basis of ‘ideology’ and ‘association’. Thus, it can be seen ?that the above are the signs of moving from democracy to autocracy.