“Oppressive” Laws? Delhi Bar Council Calls for Halt on New Criminal Laws

The Bar Council of Delhi (BCD) has called for a deferral of the implementation of three new criminal laws, urging Home Minister Amit Shah to hold back due to their perceived “oppressive” nature. This comes as a direct challenge to the Supreme Court’s recent judgments upholding the constitutionality of these laws.

The BCD’s stance is rooted in concerns regarding the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Amendment Act, 2019 (UAPA), the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act, 1985, and the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002. The council believes these laws pose serious threats to fundamental rights and could lead to an increase in wrongful convictions.

Here’s a breakdown of their concerns:

• UAPA: The BCD argues that the amendments to the UAPA have broadened the definition of “terrorist activities,” making it easier to label individuals as terrorists. This can lead to arbitrary arrests and detention without fair trial, as the law provides for lengthy pre-trial detention.

• NDPS Act: The BCD expresses concern about the stringent provisions of the NDPS Act, particularly the mandatory minimum sentences for drug-related offenses. They argue that these provisions are inflexible and do not allow for considering individual circumstances, potentially leading to harsh punishments for minor offenses.

• PMLA: The BCD criticizes the PMLA for its broad definition of “money laundering,” which they claim can be applied arbitrarily. They also point to concerns regarding the law’s provisions on attachment and seizure of assets, which they argue can be abused to target individuals without due process.

Beyond the legal arguments:

• The BCD has also highlighted the practical challenges of implementing these laws. They cite reports of overcrowded prisons and a lack of adequate legal resources as major obstacles to ensuring fair trials and protecting the rights of accused individuals.

• Additionally, the council points to the need for thorough investigation and evidence collection to ensure convictions based on concrete evidence rather than presumption.

Awaiting the Government’s Response:

The BCD’s appeal to Home Minister Amit Shah is a significant development, bringing the debate about these controversial laws back into the spotlight. It remains to be seen how the government will respond to the council’s concerns and whether the Supreme Court’s judgments will be revisited in light of these arguments.

This situation underscores the crucial role of the judiciary and legal bodies in safeguarding individual rights and ensuring the proper functioning of the justice system.