What do civil libertarians say to that?
Since terrorism in India is mostly of the cross-border kind, former Delhi high court chief justice Rajinder Sachar says the National Security Act, the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, and the Armed Forces Special Powers Act are sufficient to deal with any situation thrown up by terrorists. And the national president of the People’s Union of Civil Liberties, K G Kannabiran, writes that for more than 50 years, the Centre has been dealing with J&K and the Northeast as a law-and-order issue. Repressive laws have been employed to rule them, and repression over time produces mindless violence. “Repression”? Yes. The manner in which the government has defined “terrorism” and “terrorist acts” under POTO has kicked up a ruckus. And the sweeping powers it invests in the police to arrest, detain and interrogate those it considers terrorists, and the tight bail provisions, have heightened fears of their misuse, leading to harassment, extortion and torture of innocent people. The PUCL points o
