New Delhi , October 11,2021: Justice Rohinton Nariman, former Supreme Court judge, has urged the top court to strike down colonial-era sedition law and offensive parts of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (UAPA).
Speaking at a function organised by the Viswanath Pasayat Memorial Committee, Justice Nariman has said that it is “important for the court” to strike down Section 124A (sedition) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) which criminalises sedition.
He called the UAPA a “draconian legislation” and said the law requires to be scrutinised by the top court.
Justice Nariman was of the view that the top court should not refer the batch of petitions pending before it on the sedition law to the Central government and that it should assert its power of judicial review to strike down the contentious Section 124A.
“I would exhort the Supreme Court to not send sedition law cases pending before it back to the Centre. Governments will come and go (but) it is important for the court to use its power and strike down Section 124A and an offensive portion of UAPA. Then citizens here would breathe more freely,” Justice Rohinton said.
He explained how UAPA came into the statute book after India’s wars with Pakistan and China.
“We had the China and Pakistan wars. Thereafter, we introduced the draconian legislation– UAPA. Disaffection continues in the statute book and UAPA is a draconian act as it has no anticipatory bail and has a minimum of five years imprisonment. This act is not under scanner yet. This too has to be looked into along with the sedition law,” Justice Nariman said.
He also recounted how the British used the sedition law against Indians including prominent freedom fighters and mentioned how Bal Gangadhar Tilak, Mahatma Gandhi and Jawaharlal Nehru were convicted for sedition for speaking against the colonial government.
Justice Nariman also highlighted India’s rank in the global law index which is 142 “because of the draconian and colonial laws that still exist”. He said the Nobel Peace Prize was conferred on two journalists from the Philippines and Russia, and India was at rank 142 despite being known as the world’s largest democracy.
The former judge, who retired in August after a seven-year tenure in the top court, had in 2015 quashed Section 66A of the Information Technology Act for having the “chilling effect” on the right to freedom of speech. Section 66A gave the government power to arrest and imprison an individual for allegedly “offensive and menacing” online posts and conviction could fetch a maximum of three years in jail.
On July 15, Chief Justice of India NV Ramana had questioned the government on the requirement of sedition law even after 75 years of independence and pointed out that sedition law was used against freedom fighters like Mahatma Gandhi and Bal Gangadhar Tilak.
“Our concern is a misuse of the law and the lack of accountability. Why it continues in the statute book after 75 years of our Independence,” CJI had said, adding that sedition law was meant to suppress the freedom movement and asked what was its need today.
CJI Ramana had said that the apex court will look into the plea challenging the Constitutional validity of section 124A while observing that it is a “serious threat to the functioning of individuals and parties”.
CJI had further said that “use of sedition is like giving a saw to the carpenter to cut a piece of wood and he uses it to cut the entire forest itself” while adding that conviction rate under Section 124A is very low.
The top court CJI Bench had asked Attorney General for India KK Venugopal why sedition law can’t be repealed. Attorney General had replied that section 124A need not be struck down and only guidelines are set out so that section meets its legal purpose.
The penal provision is punishable with a jail term ranging between three years and a life term, with or without a fine.
Sept 16,2021:The International Criminal Court (ICC) has formally authorised an official probe into alleged crimes against humanity in Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte’s “war on drugs”, dealing a moral victory to human rights defenders and families of victims killed, including innocent children.
In a statement issued on Wednesday, the Hague-based tribunal said there was “reasonable basis” to proceed with the probe noting that “specific legal element of the crime against humanity of murder” has been met in the crackdown that left thousands dead.
The ICC’s pre-trial chamber also said that while it recognises the Philippines’ duty to fight drug smuggling and addiction, the “so-called ‘war on drugs’ campaign cannot be seen as a legitimate law enforcement operation, and the killings neither as legitimate nor as mere excesses in an otherwise legitimate operation”.
The order to investigate was signed by Judges Péter Kovács, Reine Adélaïde Sophie Alapini-Gansou and María del Socorro Flores Liera.
The court said that its judges considered the evidence presented on behalf of at least 204 victims, and what they found suggested that a “widespread and systematic attack against the civilian population took place pursuant to or in furtherance of a state policy”.
The ICC also noted that they have reviewed supporting materials that indicate that Philippine authorities “failed to take meaningful steps to investigate or prosecute the killings.” It also noted that that perpetrators of the killings were even offered “cash payments, promotions or awards for killings in the so-called ‘war on drugs’ campaign.”
Former ICC prosecutor Fatou Bensouda filed the request to investigate just before her retirement in June, alleging that “state actors, primarily members of the Philippine security forces, killed thousands of suspected drug users and other civilians during official law enforcement operations.”
Bensouda’s successor, Prosecutor Karim Khan, will now oversee the actual probe and possible trial of the case.
When Bensouda’s recommendation was announced in June, Duterte dismissed the news saying it was “bulls**t” while threatening to “slap” the ICC magistrates.
In an interview with DZBB, a Manila-based radio station on Thursday, Salvador Panelo, the president’s legal counsel repeated previous statements staying that the Duterte administation will not cooperate with the investigation.
Panelo also said that ICC investigators would not be permitted to enter the country to conduct the probe.
New Delhi, Aug 20,2021: President Ram Nath Kovind has given assent to the OBC Bill, passed by Parliament unanimously in the recently concluded Monsoon Session, sources said on Friday.
With the President’s signature, the Bill has become law restoring the powers of the states and Union territories to have their own list of OBCs. According to the sources, the legislation was signed on Wednesday.
The Constitution (One Hundred Twenty Seventh) Amendment Bill was passed unanimously by both Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha. While Opposition parties had been protesting over the Pegasus snooping controversy, new farm laws, price rise and other issues in both Houses, they agreed to debate and pass this legislation.
On May 5, the Supreme Court, in a judgment, said only the Centre has the right to update the OBC list. The Bill was then brought to nullify the effect of the order and restore the powers of the states to identify backward class groups.
New Delhi , August 10,2021: Minister of State for Home Affairs Nityanand Rai in a written reply to Lok Sabha on Tuesday said that the Central Government had proscribed the Islamic State of Iraq and Levant (ISIL) or Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS), Daesh as a terrorist organisation under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967.
Rai said, “Some instances of individuals from different states including Kerala having joined is have come to the notice of Central and State Security Agencies. The National Investigation Agency (NIA) and the States Police have registered cases against such individuals and have taken action as per law.”
He further stated that “The primary responsibility for Public Order’ and ‘Policing’ rests with the State Governments. However, in matters such as terrorism, the Central Government assists the State Governments in acknowledging it as the shared responsibility. Intelligence and Security agencies of the Centre and States work in tandem to keep a close watch on the elements involved in terrorist acts and take action as per law.”
“The Central Government has also proscribed the Islamic State (IS) Islamic State of Iraq and Levant (ISIL). Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS), Daesh as a Terrorist Organization under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967,” he added.
Jul,25,2021: The Delhi High Court has said that the Foreigners Regional Registration Office (FRRO) cannot insist on the physical or virtual presence of both the spouses for processing Overseas Citizenship of India (OCI) card applications for one of them.
The high court’s order came while asking FRRO to accept the OCI card application of an Iranian woman, who has been living separately in Bengaluru after her relationship with her husband, an Indian citizen, turned sour.
The woman, in her plea, said their marriage was solemnised in Dubai, U.A.E, in May 2009. Shortly after they consummated the marriage, she relocated to Bengaluru at her husband’s insistence.
However, as their relationship soured, the woman said her husband left her in Bengaluru, to reside with his family in Goa.
On November 14, 2020, the woman generated her application for an OCI card on the basis of her marriage, and went to submit it to the local FRRO in Bengaluru. However, the officials refused to accept the form stating that the presence of her husband was requisite for processing her application.
‘Marriage is proof’
The woman submitted that once her marriage with an Indian citizen since 2009 has been proved and is an undisputed fact, the same should be enough to merit grant of an OCI card in her name.
On the other hand, the Centre’s counsel argued that unless her spouse comes forward at the time of making the OCI card application, the FRRO cannot even consider the same. The counsel sought to rely on a checklist prescribed by the FRRO for submission of the OCI card application.
Justice Palli, however, pointed out that the provision in the Visa Manual “merely makes it requisite for all OCI applicants to be present for a personal interview, either physically or through video conferencing”.
“…Given that there is no rule or guideline which mandates the presence of both the spouses at the time of making application for an OCI card, it is surprising that the Checklist was formulated in a manner to impose such a condition,” Justice Palli observed.
“Thus, the very imposition of such a requirement on OCI card applicants, being unsupported by any Rule/Formal Guideline, cannot be permitted to operate,” Justice Palli said while directing the FRRO to process the woman’s OCI card application in accordance with law within a period of six weeks.
New Delhi , July 20,2021: Justice A K Mishra, Chairperson, National Human Rights Commission, India on Tuesday said that the States need to repeal the laws and various provisions, which are discriminating against the leprosy-affected persons.
These need to be replaced by the policies and frameworks that will protect their human rights, read a release by the NHRC.
Justice Mishra was chairing a meeting organised by the Commission to discuss the issues related to the persons affected with leprosy. He said that concerted efforts need to be made to sensitize and create necessary awareness among different stakeholders that leprosy is not a very contagious disease and that the people affected with it can be cured and can be integrated into the main-stream and co-habited with their families.
Expressing serious concern over the poor living conditions of the colonies of leprosy-affected persons, the NHRC Chairperson said that some drastic and concrete measures are required to be taken to ensure that the schemes and the funds meant for the welfare of leprosy-affected persons and their colonies are implemented with all earnest and earmarked funds are utilised properly.
He said that the Civil Society and NGOs also need to work more sincerely to ameliorate the cause of leprosy-affected persons and to integrate their colonies with the mainstream of society. Concerted efforts also need to be made to convince leprosy-affected persons to go back to their homes, the release said.
The meeting was attended by NHRC Members Justice M M Kumar and Rajiv Jain, Secretary-General, Bimbadhar Pradhan, Additional Secretary, R K Khandelwal, experts Vineeta Shanker, former Executive Director of Sasakawa India Leprosy Foundation and Nikita Sarah of Leprosy Mission India, among others.
“During the discussions, it was strongly felt that besides several problems notwithstanding, the COVID-19 pandemic further worsened the condition of leprosy-affected persons, particularly with regards to their food and livelihood,” read the release.
Some of the other important suggestions that emerged during the discussions include States need to conduct a study to know how many leprosy cases are being reported every year to understand whether the disease is declining or increasing in the country.
It also emphasised on the need for States to conduct a study to know the number of colonies of leprosy-affected persons and the number of people living there.
“States need to appoint a nodal welfare officer to act as a bridge between the State machinery and the colonies of leprosy-affected persons to help them get benefits of the Government schemes; Focus on the education and counselling of the children of leprosy affected people to overcome the stigma and help them integrate with the mainstream of the society; Ensure that sanitation, water, electricity and other basic amenities including healthcare, financial assistance is provided to the leprosy-affected people living in the separate colonies; Provide them skills for their socio-economic empowerment to earn sustainable livelihoods with dignity; and States need to set-up a system of monitoring of funds given to NGOs working for the welfare of leprosy-affected persons to ensure proper utilisation of funds,” read the suggestions as per the NHRC release.