Law versus flaw
Some disturbing provisions of the three new criminal laws that came into effect from July 1, as explained by legal experts
■ Terrorism, corruption and organised crime shifted from the province of special legislation to ordinary criminal law, some of whose provisions have undergone a consequent stringency.
■ Maximum duration of police custody increased from 15 days to 90 days, raising fears of police excesses and coerced confessions.
■ Sedition law changed only in name and the punishment — earlier three years to fife — increased to a flat life sentence.
■ Police given discretion to prosecute under the new laws or existing statutes like the anti-terror UAPA without clear guidelines, raising questions about consistency, fairness and accountability.
■ Definition of “terrorism” expanded beyond the UAPA to include acts that ‘disturb public order or “destabilise the country, raising concerns about misuse against dissent and protest.
■ Vaguely worded offences relating to “terrorism”, “organised crime” and “acts” endangering sovereignty leave scope for arbitrary application and infringement on the freedom of speech and personal liberty.
■ Provision of legal aid from the point of arrest has been removed, which could hinder access to justice and fair legal representation.
■ Introduction of trial in absentia shifts the burden of proof onto the accused.
■ Provision of statutory bail for people who face multiple charges removed, increasing the risk of lengthy pre-trial imprisonment.
■ Criminalisation of sexual intercourse under “deceitful means”, such as false promises of employment or marriage, with up to 10-year jail terms. This risks criminalising consensual relationships.
■ The new criminal laws retain the old provision of CrPC Section 41 which gives power to arrest a person without warrant if he is suspected of having committed a cognisable offence.
Author: Imran Ahmed Siddiqui
Source: The Telegraph online
