Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

 

 THE DEPUTY PRIME MINISTER AND IN CHARGE OF THE MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS AND MINISTRY OF PERSONNEL, PUBLIC GRIEVANCES AND PENSIONS (SHRI L.K. ADVANI): Sir, I beg to move:

"That the Bill to amend the Prevention of Terrorism Act, 2002, be taken into consideration. "SHRI BASU DEB ACHARIA : Sir, this is the third Ordinance which is now sought to be replaced by an Act. During the inter-Session period, as many as seven Ordinances were promulgated by this Government in spite of an observation made by the former Speaker and the first Speaker of Lok Sabha that Ordinances should not be ordinarily promulgated by the Government and that the Government should come forward with a Bill. But here the Government seeks to amend a provision of the Prevention of Terrorism Act. POTA was enacted in the Joint Session of Parliament.

श्री बसुदेव आचार्य :राज्यसभा में वोटिंग नहीं हुई।

MR. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: Are you yielding to him?

SHRI L.K. ADVANI: Sir, I am not yielding. I am merely telling him that the Bill was not accepted. … (Interruptions)

SHRI BASU DEB ACHARIA : There was no voting in Rajya Sabha. … (Interruptions)

MR. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: Shri Basau Deb Acharia, he is not yielding.

SHRI L.K. ADVANI: If you have seen the Constitution, only when there is a difference between the two Houses – one House adopts a motion and the other House does not adopt it – only then, a Joint Session can be convened. We cannot convene a Joint Session only on the basis that the Rajya Sabha is not going to pass it. Only when the Rajya Sabha does not pass it, only then, the Government is entitled to call a Joint Session. It is after that.

SHRI DALIT EZHILMALAI (TIRUCHIRAPPALLI): What is there for the Central Government to say when the State Government is enforcing the law? Enforcing the law is in the hands of the State Government.

SHRI L.K. ADVANI: Yes, it is.

SHRI DALIT EZHILMALAI : Then, where is the question of the Central Government going to file an affidavit in the Supreme Court?

SHRI L.K. ADVANI: Therefore, let us understand that so far as law and order is concerned, it is not merely this law, POTA, but even the simple provision of the Indian Penal Code can be abused by any Government. I can give you hundreds of examples. In fact, here in this country we have a provision in the law or in the Constitution which is of a draconian nature. Article 356 is a provision in the Constitution which perhaps no other federal Government would accept. It is nowhere in other federal Constitutions, but we have it in the Indian Constitution.

I remember this. You go through the debates of the Constituent Assembly. There were Members of the Constituent Assembly who said that this would be abused. The then Law Minister, Dr. Ambedkar expressed the hope that this would remain a dead letter that it would not be abused, that it would be used very rarely. What has happened actually?

SHRI BASU DEB ACHARIA: It is abused.

SHRI L.K. ADVANI: Yes, but let me tell you that when we came to power, I was in the Government. We came to power after the Emergency. A proposal was made to that Government to repeal article 356, to repeal article 352, and we did not agree because we felt that the Constitution makers had been essentially correct in wanting provisions like articles 352 and 356.