An Overview Of Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Amendment Act, 2019

Introduction

Unlawful activity is concerned with a wide array of illegal activities that are done by an
individual, enterprise or at times even our own government and state. It is very laborious to
define unlawful activities in a layman language owing to its immenseness. In context to the
Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967, unlawful activity is essentially that activity that
excites any individual or group of individuals to bring about cession or secession in the county,
which also causes disruption in the sovereignty and the integrity of our country and which cause
or intend to cause disaffection against India. In simple words, it is the law which is made to curb
terrorism and punish people and organizations which excites the feeling of terrorism and works
to disrupt integrity and sovereignty of India.

Terrorism has no religion and it is against humanity. Terrorism has vastly affected India in past
and continues to do so. The reasons for terrorism in India may vary vastly from religious to

geographical hob nobbings. To curb these activities the government introduced an amendment in
the UAPA.

History of Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act

UAPA received the assent of the president on 30 December, 1967. The main motive for
introducing this bill back then was effective prevention of unlawful activities of associations in
India because at that time these organizations in India was working toward disrupting the
integrity and sovereignty of the country by spreading propaganda of secession of the country.
This law was amended for the first time in 2004. The major change that this amendment brought
was to the definition of ‘unlawful activity’ which now included definition of ‘terrorist act’ and
‘terrorist organization’ from repealed POTA and this amendment also introduced the concept of
‘terrorist gang’

In 2008 another amendment to UAPA was moved and adopted after the terrorist attack that took
place in Mumbai. Provisions similar to POTA and TADA were introduced in this amendment.
The third amendment to the law took place in 2012. This amendment was done in keeping the
view of the economic security of the nation. It was basically done to fulfill FATF commitments.
Features of Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act

A brief summary of new features that are introduced through the amendment is given below.

1. The Act empowers the central government to designate an individual as a ‘terrorist’ if he is

found committing, preparing, promoting or otherwise involved in any act of terror

2. The government is not required to give an individual an opportunity to be heard before being
designated.

3. Under the law, personal/financial information of an individual designated as a terrorist can be

shared with various Western agencies.

4. it gives power to officers of the rank of Inspector of NIA to investigate the offences under
chapter IV and Chapter VI.

5. The bill seeks to empower NIA to conduct raids anywhere without the relevant state
government's prior permission, a clause that has raised concerns and caused consternation in
various quarters.

6. To allay fears about misuse of the law, the home ministry has said that an individual
designated as a terrorist can appeal to the Home Secretary, who will have to dispose of the
appeal within 45 days.

7. If not satisfied with the Home Secretary's decision, the individual in question can move to the
review committee headed by a sitting/retired judge of a high court and comprising at least two
retired secretaries of the central government. And after that appeal could also be done in HC or
SC

8. The provisions of the law are similar to a UN policy used by the Security Council to apply
pressure on a state or entity to comply with the objectives set by the UN without resorting to the
use of force.

Need For the new amendments

There is not one but umpteen number of reasons why there’s the need for the new amendment.
With the advent of time and terrorist activities taking new shape it was necessary to introduce an
amendment in the UAPA. It is necessary to keep law enforcement agencies a step ahead of
terrorists and their activities. The new stringent amendment act, Unlawful Activities (Prevention)
Act, 2019 is introduced to fight terrorism and it has been amended keeping in view the need of
the hour, how much terrorist organizations and individuals, their ways and method, mode of
spreading their propaganda has greatly increased and aggravated. Amendment to the existing act
was a necessary step to escalate our fight against the increased and aggravated terrorist activities
with efficiency and to put rest to their activities which are against all of humanity.

Terrorism has no religion and is against humanity. The UAPA amendment law is not against any
person, human rights, political party, or against any specific religion. It is solely against
individuals who are a threat to humanity.

India is not the first country to declare individuals as terrorist the countries which already has
strict laws that declare an individual terrorist are-

1. USA (the country which is considered the champion of human right)

2. Pakistan

3. China

4. Israel

5. European Union and

6. United Nations Security Council (which is considered as the advocate of Human rights)

This act would help in ease of operation of National Intelligence Authority. To show the
efficiency of NIA some facts are put NIA had 278 cases registered under UAPA from 2014 till
2019. Out of 278 cases in 204 cases charge sheet was filed. Total of 54 cases have got their
verdict and out of 54 cases in 48 cases offenders have been convicted. This shows the accuracy
rate of NIA. The conviction rate of NIA is highest in the whole of the world.

The cases registered by NIA under UAPA are very heinous kind of terrorist act roots of which
generally spreads interstate as well as international. The power transferred to NIA through this
act makes sure that NIA can work efficiently to get hold of the criminals easily. The power
transfer does not mean that the state has been ripped off of the previous powers they had. Powers
that the state government had has just been extended to NIA.
The need felt for introducing this amendment arise due to the loopholes in the UAPA, under
UAPA actions were taken against only organizations which almost every time led to offenders
being at large and continuing with their activity under a different banner name. One example is
of a known terrorist Yasin Bhatkal who is the founder of Indian Mujahideen. He was let free due
to a lack of stringent law which could have declared him as a terrorist. The previous law declared
Indian Mujahideen as a terrorist outfit but failed to designate its founder as a terrorist. Yasin
Bhatkal could have been prosecuted and have got the sentence if stringent laws regarding
terrorism were applied at that point in time.

Concerns regarding the amendment of Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act

The main point of concern regarding this bill is that it hinders the human right of a person who is
being subjected to this law. Specific human rights, per se, right to be tried in the court of law. To
clear this false notion regarding the amendment act, the government has provided a provision in
the bill that a review committee will review the case of a person who has been designated as
terrorist. If a person is not satisfied by the verdict of the review committee he can anytime appeal
in the honorable High Court or the Supreme Court. The person would be provided with the
umpteen number of opportunities to prove his innocence, thereby not depriving a person of his
basic human right which is to prove his innocence. The process follows the 4 step scrutiny
process that assures no one’s human rights is compromised.

Another point of concern regarding this bill is that it gives too many power to a government
agency and it can be used as a tool to seek political revenge/vendetta. To clear the standing
regarding this point it is duly noted that the amendment has clearly written in it that under which
situations can a person be designated as terrorist thereby nullifying the chances of its unlawful
use. The provisions laid out in the act which tells us when a person can be declared as a terrorist
are-

1. When a person does the act of terrorism

2. When the person aids in the act of terrorism

3. When the person plans an act of terrorism

4. When the person is indulged with a listed terrorist organization.

5. When the person spreads the propaganda that can brainwash people into spreading terrorism.

Another issue concerning the human rights of a person is regarding the confiscation of the
personal property of a person designated as a terrorist. So as to make the stand clear on it the
amendment act does not allow investigation authority to confiscate the property of a person
involved in the terrorist activities, it only allows the investigation agencies to attach the property
of the person. The final declaration of confiscation of the personal property rests with the court
after the proper trial has been conducted.

Criticism of UAPA

One of the major criticism of this bill is that this Law allows a person to be called a terrorist
without FIR, charge sheet or trial. Section 35 Sub Section 2 as amended reads: “The Centre shall
exercise its power under Clause (a) of Sub Section 1 in respect of an organization or an
individual only if it believes that such an organisation and individual is involved in terrorism”.

What it means is that if the Central Government believes that an individual is involved in
terrorism, the individual will be named as terrorist. There will be no FIR, no charge sheet, no
trial and no conviction and yet, the individual will be designated as a terrorist.

Opposition fears that this law could be used as a tool to seek political vendetta according to
whims and fancies of the government in power.

Conclusion

A law has to depend on us for its existence and effective implementation. It is nebulous to
assume that the law itself would eradicate crime and terrorism. The law depends upon the will
and the intention of the implementers. The new law introduced in the parliament has shown to
the world that India is keen to fight terrorism to its core.

This act gives essence to the fact that an organization is made up of individuals and if we punish
individuals we will ultimately be crippling the propaganda that an individual spread through his
organization which even goes on after it gets banned because the individual is still at large.

The law passed by the government will only hold good if the government would not harass
genuine social activist and if the government do not misuse this law according to its own whims
and fancies. Certainly the government needs to ensure that there are effective law enforcement
mechanisms to prevent and punish terrorist attacks and it is put only to this use.