Parliament security breach accused booked under UAPA: What is this stringent law?

Parliament witnessed startling scenes on Wednesday (13 December) as two men entered the Lok Sabha chamber and opened coloured smoke canisters. They were overpowered by some MPs and security personnel and taken away by the Delhi Police. Two other individuals, a man and a woman, were arrested outside the Parliament for spraying yellow-coloured smoke from canisters. A fifth accused, Lalit Jha, is absconding, while a sixth suspect, identified as Vicky, has been detained by the police. Four accused – Manoranjan D, Sagar Sharma, Neelam and Amol Shinde – have been charged under the anti-terror Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA), Indian Express reported citing the Delhi Police. An FIR has been lodged against them under several provisions of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), and Sections 16 and 18 of the UAPA. As many as eight security personnel have also been suspended by the Lok Sabha secretariat over the massive security breach. What is this stringent UAPA law? Let’s understand. History of the law The Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) has evolved to become India’s main anti-terrorism law. It was intially implemented to target secessionist activities. The law came into being in the mid-1960s when the Central government was seeking a stringent law to curb acts of secession. [caption id=“attachment_13503212” align=“alignnone” width=“640”] A paramilitary soldier stands guard inside the premises of the Parliament in New Delhi, 13 December. AP[/caption] As per an Indian Express report, the National Integration Council formed a panel in 1962 that suggested “reasonable restrictions” on some fundamental rights. A peasant uprising in Naxalbari in March 1967, as well as the DMK fighting elections in Tamil Nadu with secession from India being a part of their manifesto further created a sense of urgency, as per reports. Thus, the UAPA finally came into force on 30 December 1967. The law allowed the Centre to declare an association or a body of individuals ‘unlawful’ if they participated in activities that called for or supported “the cession of a part of the territory of India”, or its “secession”, or which questions or rejects India’s sovereignty and territorial integrity, reported The Hindu. ALSO READ: Why did the intruders breach Parliament? Was it to protest against unemployment? Multiple amendments The Act was first amended in 2004, with “and for dealing with terrorist activities” added to its title, as per Indian Express. It was at this time that the Congress-led United Progressive Alliance (UPA) government repealed the Prevention of Terrorism Act (POTA) amid public outrage. However, it heavily amended the UAPA to fill the vacuum. The amended legislation revised the definition of ‘unlawful activity’, and added the definition of ‘terrorist act’ and ‘terrorist organisation’ from the repealed POTA, along with adding the concept of a ‘terrorist gang’, reported The Wire. According to Indian Express, the amendment introduced Chapter IV (Sections 15 to 23), and Chapter V which deals with “proceeds of terrorism” and empowers the authorities to seize such proceeds and forfeit properties owned by those accused of terrorism. The Centre updated Section 1 of the Act to make illegal acts committed by Indian citizens abroad a punishable offence under the law. In Section 2, which defined ‘unlawful activity’, the amendment added the clause “which causes or intended to cause disaffection against India”, the newspaper reported. Following the 26/11 Mumbai attacks in 2008, more amendments were made to the UAPA to widen the definition of terrorism and incorporate restrictions on bail, longer incarceration, and maximum period in police custody. In Section 15, which defined terrorism by way of the use of explosives, or poisons and gases, the government added the vague phrase “any other means”. The UAPA was again amended in 2012 to expand the definition of “terrorist act” to include certain offences, such as production, smuggling and distribution of counterfeit Indian currency, that threaten the “economic security” of the country. The amendment also enhanced the period an organisation could be declared as “an unlawful association” from two years to five years, noted Indian Express. In 2019, the Act was further modified to give the government power to designate individuals as terrorists. Before this, only organisations could be designated as “terrorists”. The Act also empowered the National Investigation Agency (NIA) to seize assets of terrorists across the country. ALSO READ: Body scanners, glass on visitors’ gallery: Big security changes after Lok Sabha breach Why is the law controversial? The UAPA has been termed a “draconian” law by human rights activists. The law allows detention without a chargesheet for up to 180 days, while the maximum duration of police custody can be 30 days. There is no provision for anticipatory bail in cases of terrorism and it is extremely tough to obtain bail after arrest. [caption id=“attachment_13503232” align=“alignnone” width=“640”] Two accused, who were protesting outside Parliament and used smoke canisters, were also arrested. PTI[/caption] Section 43D(5) of the Act states that a suspect cannot be granted bail if the court is of the view that there are reasonable grounds to believe that the charges are “prima facie true”, reported The Hindu. Moreover, Section 43 E of the UAPA puts the onus of proof on the accused if they are found in possession of arms or ammunition used to carry out an act of terrorism. According to the statute, the court would presume that the person is guilty of terrorism, noted Indian Express. This is why the law is criticised as draconian as it deems it almost impossible for the accused to secure bail until the completion of the trial.

With inputs from agencies