NEW DELHI, Nov 10 (UNI) terrorism has claimed 54,000 lives in the past 15 years in the country and a legal challenge to this menace is imperative, according to union law and justice minister Arun Jaitley.
Speaking at a panel discussion after releasing a book titled combating terrorism: the legal challenge authored by television journalist Arnab Goswami here yesterday, Mr Jaitely said the legal dimensions of terrorism have been highlighted in recent times particularly in the backdrop of the September 11 attacks on the US and promulgation of the prevention of terrorism ordinance (POTO).
Indicating what he believed to be insufficiency of ordinances against terrorism, he referred to the issue of the special investigating team (SIT) for the Rajiv Gandhi assassination case.
He asserted that the conviction of the accused under section 302 IPC by the supreme court was not on the basis of ordinary evidence, but those gathered using the provisions of the terrorism and disruptive activities (prevention) act despite the fact that the assassination took place in front of 5,000 people.
Apart from Mr Jaitely, the panelists incldued congress leader Jaipal Raddy, Rajya Sabha member L M Singhvi, CPI(M) leader Sitaram Yechury and former Punjab police chief K P S Gill.
The minister said legal challenges were a necessity to counter terrorism apart from measures like intelligence, political settlements, international consesus and pressure from the government machinery.
Specifically mentioning the challenge areas to be addressed by the new ordinance, he said terrorist funding, making contributions to terrorist organisations and amassing of assets and property through engaging in terrorism-related activities would be brought into the legal purview.
The most important provision was to use intercepts and confessions made by members of terrorist organisations as evidence.
However, this provision came under attack from Mr Jaipal Reddy who termed it as one sided .
He said there was no dearth of special acts.
What was needed was more effective implementation and not a new law.
Referring to TADA, he claimed that it was invoked more in places outside than in areas affected by terrorism.
Citing the example of Gujarat, he alleged that 9,000 farmers were booked under TADA when Mr Chimanbhai Patel was the chief minister.
Mr Reddy said artcile 20 ensures citizens right against self incrimination and the POTO was a violation of this right.
He summed up this act as invasive legislationand intrusive policing and said bad laws were the worst form of tyranny.
Mr Yechury described the ordinance as not a law against terrorists but for terrorising the society.
He equated it with fundamentalism and said the safeguards against its misuse were non-existent.
In fact, the relatives of those accused of terrorism could be arrested and kept behind the bars without bail for more than an year, he added.
Mr Gill, however, expressed happiness over what he termed as a consensus over the need for a legal challenge to terrorism despite the ongoing debate among the political parties on the issue.
