seedhi Posted September 10, 2008 Posted September 10, 2008 The Congress is blatantly playing party minority politics with the issue of terrorism, when it was the Congress which passed the Maharashtra terror law and the refuses to give assent to the Gujarat act. http://www.rediff.com/news/2008/sep/10ahd.htm Cannot OK Gujarat's anti-terror law, says Centre The Centre on Wednesday told the Gujarat high court that it was unable to give consent to the Narendra Modi [images] government's anti-terror legislation as it was on the lines of the Prevention of Terrorism [images] Activities Act which had been repealed. The court had asked the Union home ministry to give its reply on a petition filed by an NGO, Justice on Trial, on the delay in the clearance of the Gujarat Control of Organised Crime bill which was pending before the President for the last four years. In an affidavit submitted to the court, the ministry said the executive at the national level cannot recommend the passage of the bill by the state legislature if a law of the same nature has been repealed by the Union legislature. The affidavit also said it has been concluded during the detailed examination that it would not be in consonance with the policy of the central government, which led to repeal of POTA, to recommend the passage of any such legislation which contains similar provisions. The affidavit further said the proposal of the state government has been submitted for consideration of the cabinet and it is expected that the decision on it will be taken in near future. Chief Justice K S Radhakrishnan and Justice M S Shah, after listening to submissions by the lawyer of central government Harin Rawal regarding the affidavit, fixed the next hearing after one month. In its petition on GUJCOC, aimed against organised crime and terrorism, the NGO had questioned how a legislation passed by elected representatives of a state of can be blocked "on the basis of political ideology of a party". It said that states like Maharashtra, Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh and Delhi [images] have such laws, but the central government was not allowing such a law for Gujarat.
Lurker Posted September 10, 2008 Posted September 10, 2008 The Congress is blatantly playing party minority politics with the issue of terrorism, when it was the Congress which passed the Maharashtra terror law and the refuses to give assent to the Gujarat act. http://www.rediff.com/news/2008/sep/10ahd.htm Interesting. From the link that you have provided this is what I could fathom In an affidavit submitted to the court, the ministry said the executive at the national level cannot recommend the passage of the bill by the state legislature if a law of the same nature has been repealed by the Union legislature. That kinda makes sense, doesnt it? If a similar law has been repealed by Center, it would be impossible to let another legislation pass. Or did I miss something :nervous:
CC1981 Posted September 10, 2008 Posted September 10, 2008 That kinda makes sense, doesnt it? If a similar law has been repealed by Center, it would be impossible to let another legislation pass. Or did I miss something My thoughts exactly. Infact, by doing so, the congress might've saved us a lotta tax dollars and valuable supreme court time, for the supreme court would no doubt repeal this law/declare it unconstitutional the moment a plaintiff comes into view : You simply cannot have a state law that is repealed by the center. Otherwise, its a non-sequitur and a contradiction and sure path to anarchy: what would be then the difference between a district having a contradictory law to the state or my moholla having a law exactly opposite ?
seedhi Posted September 10, 2008 Author Posted September 10, 2008 That kinda makes sense, doesnt it? If a similar law has been repealed by Center, it would be impossible to let another legislation pass. Or did I miss something :nervous: A very lame argument. Similar anti terror laws are in effect in Maharashtra and Karnataka. I dont see any legal problem with the centre assenting to the Gujarat act. It can always be done on the basis that the security environment has changed in order to warrant such a law, for example the bomb blasts in Ahmedabad. How can a court interfere with the govts assessment that the present internal security environment demands such a law. The congress just wants minority votes in an election year.
seedhi Posted September 10, 2008 Author Posted September 10, 2008 You simply cannot have a state law that is repealed by the center. Why not? Different states may have different security requirements - law and order is a state subject. Even if a central law is repealed a state may be allowed to have similar laws based on its security needs. I mean TADA was allowed to lapse in 1995, yet Maharrashtra was allowed to enact a terror law in 1999 when there wasnt any similar law in effect at the centre (Pota came later). Otherwise, its a non-sequitur and a contradiction and sure path to anarchy: what would be then the difference between a district having a contradictory law to the state or my moholla having a law exactly opposite ? Different states have always had different laws. J&K has an almost entirely separate constitution. North east states have separate laws for security purposes. Moreover these terror laws only tighten the existing ones and provide more power to the police, they are not contradictory in nature.
Lurker Posted September 10, 2008 Posted September 10, 2008 A very lame argument. That was genuine question, althought it doesnt surprise me that you chose to resort to name calling. Typical! Similar anti terror laws are in effect in Maharashtra and Karnataka. I dont see any legal problem with the centre assenting to the Gujarat act. It can always be done on the basis that the security environment has changed in order to warrant such a law, for example the bomb blasts in Ahmedabad. How can a court interfere with the govts assessment that the present internal security environment demands such a law. The congress just wants minority votes in an election year. Do you realize that this provision was actually tabled infront of Center in 2003?? What exactly was the problems Gujrat was facing in 2003 that made it come up with such a law? Also what exactly are the Maharastra and Karnataka state laws that are similar in nature? Please provide me the links, if you have them, so I can check the difference.
seedhi Posted September 10, 2008 Author Posted September 10, 2008 That was genuine question' date=' althought it doesnt surprise me that you chose to resort to name calling. Typical![/quote'] I was calling the argument made by the center lame. Not addressed to you. Apologies if you take offence. Do you realize that this provision was actually tabled infront of Center in 2003?? What exactly was the problems Gujrat was facing in 2003 that made it come up with such a law? Also what exactly are the Maharastra and Karnataka state laws that are similar in nature? Please provide me the links, if you have them, so I can check the difference. As far as I know the Gujarat terror law was brought in 2004 after the UPA decided to repeal the POTA. There already had been a terror attack on Akshardham in Gujarat in 2002. At least now it is evidently clear that the terrorists have Gujarat on their hit list, why the delay now? I dont know how exactly they are similar in nature. But most probably they allow more leeway to police in terms of evidence collection and its admissibility in court. One thing I do know is that - POTA, the proposed Gujarat Act and the existing Maharashtra Law - all allow confessions to police to be admissible in courts. Something that is not allowed in normal circumstances.
CC1981 Posted September 11, 2008 Posted September 11, 2008 There's no requirement in the Constitution to have similar laws across board. Infact, there are three different list in the Constitution and a State Government is under no obligation to make it in conformity with similar laws in other States or Center. The Center (Executive) has no power to repeal laws. That's meant for the Legislature. Are you sure that there is no provisons saying a province/lower govt. body cannot pass a law that the higher govt,/center has specifically repealed ? If so, that doesnt make sense - thats like saying if the center banned stoning of the infidels, a state can go ahead and keep the law..eh ? if thats the case, whats the point of having a central legislative authority ??
THX_1138 Posted September 11, 2008 Posted September 11, 2008 why is this law being deemed unconstitutional? what 'section' of the constitution does it violate... i am curious since we have had a travesty of justice at a previous time with the TADA and POTA laws.
seedhi Posted September 11, 2008 Author Posted September 11, 2008 why is this law being deemed unconstitutional? what 'section' of the constitution does it violate... i am curious since we have had a travesty of justice at a previous time with the TADA and POTA laws. Its not unconstitutional, the congress govt refuses to give assent on the ridiculous basis that it repealed a similar law POTA in 2004. For some reason Gujarat is not allowed to have an anti-terror law when a similarly strict law exists for Maharashtra. POTA itself was upheld in the Supreme Court when its validity was challenged. Basically congress is playing politics with the security of people in an election year.
THX_1138 Posted September 11, 2008 Posted September 11, 2008 Its not unconstitutional' date=' the congress govt refuses to give assent on the ridiculous basis that it repealed a similar law POTA in 2004. For some reason Gujarat is not allowed to have an anti-terror law when a similarly strict law exists for Maharashtra. POTA itself was upheld in the Supreme Court when its validity was challenged. Basically congress is playing politics with the security of people in an election year.[/quote'] how about someone with more than a single digit IQ answer my sincere question.
h4te Posted September 11, 2008 Posted September 11, 2008 how about someone with more than a single digit IQ answer my sincere question. i would answer, but i don't meet the criteria....
Recommended Posts