Hi ,  welcome  |  Textile views  |  Political views  |   CA and CS News  |   Legal News  |   Government jobs  |  Textile jobs 


Written By Views maker on Saturday, July 9, 2011 | 1:06 AM

The prevention of communal and targeted violence bill, 2011 draft is ready and it seems that congress may push for this bill in next parliament session. The bills has erupted a lot of debates, There has been different views on this bill. The different views on this bill are,

1. Majority is targeted: This intend of the bill certainly not available in the draft copy but as per the NAC it’s to protect the minorities from the institutional bias. The intent seems to be good but the bill does really reflect the intension but it’s more of targeting the religion majorities.

a. Caste violence is not dealt with: There is chance of communal violence between two subsets of a religion or between members of two group who are covered in the definition of the group and in that case this law will not be applicable. This is major defect in this bill. Law should cover all minorities and not just the few or miss out a few.

Eg: Violence between scheduled tribe and religion minority will not be covered under this act. under this case the indent of the act is defeated.

b. If a minority cause any violence against the majority group then this law shall not apply but general law would apply to them. This idea is not welcomed by many.

c. The classification of the groups and indentifying of the could be problem as the status of the person would chance according to the location. some time in a place he is majority and an other place he will be a minority group.

2. Draconian aspect (sec:74 of the bill): This act prescribes a presumption that if an a person is accused of hate propaganda he will be presumed to be guilty unless he proves himself innocent. this section can easily be misused.

def of hate propaganda (sec: 8):  Hate propaganda.– Notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force, whoever publishes, communicates or disseminates by words, either spoken or written, or by signs or by visible representation or otherwise acts inciting hatred causing clear and present danger of violence against a group or persons belonging to that group, in general or specifically, or disseminates or broadcasts any information, or publishes or displays any advertisement or notice, that could reasonably be construed to demonstrate an intention to promote or incite hatred or expose or is likely to expose the group or persons belonging to that group to such hatred, is said to be guilty of hate propaganda.

3. Less action against Institution bias: The main intension of the action is protect victims of communal violence from institution bias. Though section 13, 14 and 15 talks about the responsibility of the public servants. These section are not strong enough to deal with the institution bias. This section clearly does match with the intension of the bill. The bill prescribe and deals more in protecting or giving an undue advantage to minorities and putting the interest of the majority at a risk.

This bill has a very wide scope for misuse. The bill has to be revisited and more care to exercised in re drafting it.

click to view full draft bill

click to view recent modification on the draft


Post a Comment