Indian Government has recently strengthened the anti-terrorism laws by amending the unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), 1967 and the NIA act. Analyse the changes in the context of the prevailing security environment while discussing the scope and reasons for opposing the UAPA by human rights organisations.

Recently the Parliament has amended the UAPA and NIA act to provide more powers to India’s anti-terror agency and expand the scope of India’s anti-terror law, and strengthening India’s fight against terrorism.

Changes made in UAPA:

1. The Act designate individuals also as terrorists on certain grounds provided in the Act. Earlier, organisations were under the definition of the act not the individuals.

2. The Act empowers the Director General of National Investigation Agency (NIA) to grant approval of seizure or attachment of property when the case is investigated by the said agency.

3. The Act empowers the officers of the NIA, of the rank of Inspector or above, to investigate cases of terrorism in addition to those conducted by the DSP or ACP or above rank officer in the state. 

Changes made in NIA:

1. The amendment has allowed the NIA to investigate, cases related to (i) human trafficking, (ii) counterfeit currency or banknotes, (iii) manufacture or sale of prohibited arms, (iv) cyber-terrorism, and (v) offences under the Explosive Substances Act, 1908.

2. The provisions of the act will apply to the person outside India also.

3. The 2019 amendment allowed the central government to designate Sessions Courts as Special Courts for the trial of scheduled offenses under the Act.

Analysis:

These amendments are in pursuance of the government’s zero-tolerance policy against terrorism. These hold significance in the context of the prevailing security environment.

1. Terrorism emanating from Pakistan has been a consistent challenge where terrorist are getting support of Over ground workers.

2. Now, declaring an individual as a terrorist will help the government to deal with situations like designation of Masood Azhar.

3. There is growing menace of terror financing and organised crimes like human trafficking, cyber terrorism etc. An empowered NIA is a good step in this direction.

4. The Government has banned both moderate and extremist factions of the All-India Hurriyat conference under UAPA.

Reasons for Opposing UAPA:

1. The state gives itself more powers vis-a-vis individual liberty guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution.

2. Indirect Restriction on Right to Dissent.

3. Designating an individual as a terrorist raises serious constitutional questions and has the potential for misuse. An individual cannot be called a ‘terrorist’ prior to conviction in a court of law, It subverts the principle of “innocent until proven guilty. A wrongful designation will cause irreparable damage to a person’s reputation, career and livelihood.

4. There is no set procedure for designation as a terrorist. By excluding judiciary and empowering the executive to designate, it dilutes the difference between a terrorist and a terror accused.

The amendment has brought the legal mechanism into force in tackling terrorism, but counter terror operation requires SMART Police, technologically enabled surveillance and intelligence sharing.