Why in News: The Delhi High Court recently rejected the bail plea of activist Umar Khalid under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), once again bringing focus on how extraordinary laws are allegedly misused, making the process itself a punishment.
Background
- UAPA enacted in 1967, later strengthened in 2004 and 2019.
- Initially designed for terrorism-related cases, but its ambit has widened to cover dissent and political expression.
- Predecessors like TADA (1985–95) and POTA (2002–04) also faced criticism for misuse; both were repealed after mass protests.
Issues with UAPA
1. Bail as exception: The burden of proof shifts to the accused — contrary to “innocent until proven guilty.”
2. Delay in trial: Cases linger for years; prolonged custody becomes de facto punishment.
3. Accountability deficit: No mechanism to hold police or officials liable for fabricated evidence.
4. Violation of Fundamental Rights: Curtails Article 21 (life & liberty), reduces judicial scrutiny.
5. Political misuse: Often invoked to target minorities, activists, and dissenting voices.
Consequences
- Individuals spend decades in jail only to be acquitted later.
- Victims suffer physically, financially, and mentally.
- Families and communities lose faith in justice delivery.
- Democracy weakens as dissent is criminalised.
Way Forward
- Judicial Safeguards: Strict scrutiny before invoking UAPA, fast-track trials, and bail reforms.
- Accountability: Penalties for officials who fabricate or delay cases.
- Legislative Reforms: Narrowing the definition of “terrorist act” to prevent misuse.
- Alternative Legal Frameworks: Existing criminal laws (e.g., BNSS, IPC, CrPC) are sufficient to address terrorism and crime.
- People’s Movement: Similar to opposition against TADA/POTA, civil society must demand accountability and balance security with liberty.
Conclusion
Extraordinary laws like UAPA invert justice and erode democratic principles by making “jail the rule and bail the exception.” To uphold the Constitution, India must reform or repeal such draconian laws, ensuring that the process of justice does not itself become punishment.
UPSC Relevance
GS Paper II (Polity & Governance):
Fundamental Rights (Article 21: Right to Life & Liberty, Article 19: Freedom of Speech).
GS Paper III (Internal Security):
Anti-terror laws (UAPA, TADA, POTA) and their misuse.
Mains Practice Question
Q. “Laws like the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) are intended to safeguard national security but often end up criminalising dissent and eroding fundamental rights. Critically examine.” (250 words)