Chhattisgarh Special Public Security Act

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Chhattisgarh Special Public Security Act, 2005 (CSPSA),(also called as Chhattisgarh Vishesh Jan Suraksha Adhiniyam, 2005)is a law in the state of Chhattisgarh passed by the Chhattisgarh assembly in December 2005.he Bill received the assent of the President of India and by brought into for by notification issued on 12th April, 2006. Human Rights groups calls it as a Draconian law not satisfying international human rights standards

In May 2008 People's Union for Civil Liberties filed an appeal in Supreme Court of India challenging the constitutional validity of this act. The trials are not started yet

Contents

[edit] Arrests

Six organisations were banned under this act. Dr. Binayak Sen, General Secretary, Chhattisgarh PUCL, and Vice-President, National PUCL was detained under this Act on 14th May, 2007 allegedly for his linkages with the Communist Party of India ( Maoist). He is still languishing in Raipur Central Jail

[edit] Critiques

Human rights activists says it is a perfect example of legislation enacted in the garb of security and protection, leading to increased repression and suppression of peoples rights.

The CSPSA provides provisions are far more draconian than any of the national security legislation and even authorises the police to detain a person for committing acts, which among other things, show a “tendency to pose an obstacle to the administration of law”. The act goes on to state that any person whose actions “encourage(s) the disobedience of the established law” will be considered “unlawful”.

PUDR statement says this legislation is meant to suppress all political dissent in the state This is evident from the fact that Maoist groups were already banned under 2004 amendments to the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967.Human rights groups observe [Binayak Sen]]'s Arrest is a visible example of this.

The (CHRI) has expressed its reservations about the Act, and said it may become a potential instrument to throttle the right to free speech, legitimate dissent, and trample the fundamental rights enshrined in Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution.

CHRI, in a statement, said that the present definition of “unlawful activities” imperils free exercise of fundamental freedoms set out under Article 19 of the Constitution and illustratively it appears to restrict the right to hold public meetings; organise public protests; and oppose government policies through the media.

[edit] Press Freedom

The act is barring the media from carrying reports of any kind of ‘unlawful activities’ in the state. The International Federation of Journalists (IFJ) was appealed to the President of Indianot to give his assent to “this undemocratic legislation, and initiate public debate on the complex causes of conflict, rather than treat it as a law and order problem.”

IFJ President Christopher Warren, in a statement, said, “Freedom of the press is a pre-requisite for the peaceful resolution of conflict, and restricting the media from carrying out its professional activities can only lead to more suspicion and misinformation. Under no circumstances has gagging the media and silencing journalists furthered the objective of tackling armed conflict. It is only when democratic debate and the free flow of accurate information is made possible is the cause of democracy furthered.”

[edit] References

This article about the law of India is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it.