[Congressional Record Volume 147, Number 148 (Wednesday, October 31, 2001)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E1975-E1976]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




           NEW POTO LAW IN INDIA PERHAPS MOST REPRESSIVE EVER

                                 ______
                                 

                            HON. DAN BURTON

                               of indiana

                    in the house of representatives

                      Wednesday, October 31, 2001

  Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, in 1995 the Indian law known as 
the ``Terrorist and Disruptive Activities Act (TADA)'' expired. It was 
one of the most repressive laws ever put on the books anywhere in the 
world. It allowed people to be picked up for any reason or no reason, 
held without charge or trial for an indefinite period, deprived them of 
the right to know of the charges against them or face their accusers. 
The law was widely abused. When a rare TADA defendant would get 
released, the police would immediately pick him up again and often 
would file TADA complaints in more than one jurisdiction to make it 
impossible to contest. Despite the fact that it expired over six years 
ago, the Movement Against State Repression reports that over 52,000 
Sikhs are being held as political prisoners in India, most under TADA 
and many of them since 1984.
  India took TADA off the books under intense political pressure but 
continued to enforce it. Now the country that likes to boast of being 
``the world's largest democracy'' has taken advantage of the terrorist 
incident that occurred in September to promulgate a law called the 
Prevention of Terrorism Ordinance (POTO) that makes TADA look mild. 
Twenty three organizations have already been banned under POTO, 
including the International Sikh Youth Federation (ISYF), a group that 
has engaged in peaceful political protest for human rights and 
sometimes for independence for the Sikh homeland, Khalistan. This ban 
just goes to show that in the eyes of the Indian government, anyone who 
speaks up peacefully for freedom for for freedom is considered a 
``terrorist.'' Oddly, it also bans the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam 
(LTTE), which India today reported was a creation of the Indian 
government and whose leaders, according to the article, were put up in 
Delhi's finest hotel.
  In addition, POTO provides for suppression of information, and 
therefore makes journalists subject to terrorism charges if they 
publish information unfavorable to the government. It makes the 
furnishing of certain information to police investigators mandatory 
with a prison term of up to three years for failure to tell

[[Page E1976]]

them what they want to hear and it allows for coerced confessions.
  A respected retired Indian general, General Narindr Singh, said 
``Punjab is a police state.'' Under POTO, minorities in India will be 
forced to live in a police state, which is even more brutal than 
before. Unfortunately, the United States has been trying to strengthen 
its ties with India, which in the past, voted to throw the United 
States off the Human Rights Commission and to suppress a resolution 
critical of Red Chinese human-rights violations. India, a longtime 
Soviet ally, votes against the United States at the UN more often than 
any country except Cuba. According to the Indian Express, India's 
Defense Minister, led a meeting in 1999 with the Ambassadors of Red 
China, Cuba, Russia, Yugoslavia, Libya, and Iraq to set up a security 
alliance ``to stop the U.S.''
  Mr. Speaker, why should a country with a long record of anti-
Americanism be a recipient of U.S. aid? The obvious answer is that it 
should not. The hard-working, overtaxed people of this country should 
not be supporting this brutal, corrupt, and hostile country. We should 
stop all U.S. id to India, restore the sanctions previously in place 
against that country, and put the Congress on record in support of a 
free and fair plebiscite in Kashmir, in Punjab, Khalistan, in Christian 
Negaland, and everywhere that people are seeking their freedom from 
this brutal regime. It is our obligation to the principles that give 
birth to our great country.
  Mr. Speaker, on October 26, the Tribune News Service in India ran an 
excellent article on the repressive new POTO law, which I would like to 
place in the Record at this time.

             [From the Tribune News Service, Oct. 26, 2001]

                    Centre Bans 23 Terrorist Outfits

       New Delhi, October 25--The Centre today justified the 
     promulgation of the Prevention of Terrorism Ordinance (POTO) 
     saying it is the first comprehensive legal salvo against 
     terrorism with complete safeguards to check the menace 
     speedily and effectively. Under the ordinance, 23 
     organizations have been banned. Briefing newspersons here, 
     Union Home Secretary Kamal Pande said care had been taken to 
     ensure that the 50-page, 61-clause ordinance avoided all 
     pitfalls and criticisms that the erstwhile Terrorist and 
     Disruptive Activities Prevention Act (TADA), which expired in 
     1995, had to face.
       Justifying the promulgation of the ordinance, Mr. Pande 
     said there was an upsurge in terrorist activities, 
     intensification of cross-border terrorism and insurgent 
     groups in different parts of the country and the existing 
     criminal justice system was not designed to deal with the 
     types of heinous crimes that had appeared in the country in 
     the past 50 years.
       The ordinance defines terrorist acts as those done by using 
     weapons and explosive substances or other methods in a manner 
     as to cause or likely to cause death or injuries to persons 
     or loss or damage to property or disruption of essential 
     supplies and services with intent to threaten the unity or 
     integrity of India or to strike terror in any section of the 
     people. It also has a comprehensive definition of terrorist 
     organizations indulging in terrorist acts and provides for 
     proscribing them under a set procedure.
       A total of 23 organizations have been banned under the 
     ordinance, which Mr. Pande said, would be placed before 
     Parliament in the form of a Bill for approval soon.
       ``The ordinance, of course, will have to be passed through 
     Parliament as it will be valid for a maximum period of six 
     months . . .  it will be placed before Parliament,'' he said.
       Stating that all state governments and other departments 
     concerned were consulted twice on the various provisions of 
     the ordinance and their suggestions were taken note of and 
     included wherever necessary before it was promulgated, Mr. 
     Pande said ``special features/safeguards have been built in 
     to prevent the possibility of misuse of the special power 
     given to investigating authorities also keeping in view the 
     observations of the Supreme Court.''
       Asked about the mounting criticism over the clause 
     pertaining to ``disclosure of information'', which is equally 
     applicable to journalists, Mr. Pande said the clause was in 
     line with the provisions pertaining to suppression of 
     information already existing in CrPC and the IPC. Section 
     3(8) of the ordinance places responsibility on all persons to 
     disclose information which the person knows or believes to be 
     of material assistance in preventing any terrorist activity 
     as soon as reasonably practicable to the police. However, 
     exception has been provided in case of persons engaged as 
     legal attorney of the accused who may have acquired such 
     knowledge for the purpose of preparing the defense for the 
     accused.
       Section 14 provides a new provision which makes it 
     obligatory to furnish information in respect of a terrorist 
     offense. Failure to furnish the information called for or 
     deliberately furnishing false information to investigating 
     officer shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term 
     which may extend to three years or fine or both. The 
     investigating officer can call for such information only with 
     prior approval in writing of an officer not below the rank of 
     Superintendent of Police.
       Mr. Pande said Section 32 provided for admissibility of 
     confessions made to a police officer under certain 
     conditions. But unlike TADA, the confession of an accused 
     shall not be admissible as an evidence against a co-accused. 
     Further such confessions had to be made before a police 
     officer not lower in rank of a SP and had to be further 
     recorded with a Chief Judicial Magistrate within 48 hours.
       There is a provision to review the ban and a review 
     committee headed by a sitting or retired judge of a high 
     court will be constituted to hear such applications.
       Financing of terrorism, possession of unauthorised arms, 
     explosive substances or other lethal weapons capable of mass 
     destruction and/or use in biological and chemical warfare 
     have also been brought under the purview of this ordinance 
     and the punishment could range from three years imprisonment 
     to life imprisonment or fine or both and also death penalty.
       Twenty-three organisations, including Deendar Anjuman, the 
     Students Islamic Movement of India (SIMI) and some of the 
     almost defunct outfits in Punjab have been branded as 
     terrorist organisations in the ordinance.
       The hurriedly promulgated ordinance lists the Babbar Khalsa 
     International, the Khalistan Commando Force, the Khalistan 
     Zindabad Force and the International Sikh Youth Federation 
     among the list of terrorist outfits.
       The ordinance has also branded almost all Kashmiri and 
     North-East militant outfits and the Liberation Tigers of 
     Tamil Eelam (LTTE) as terrorist organisations.
       The outfits operating in Kashmir, which have been listed as 
     terrorist organisations, are the Lashkar-e-Toiba/Pasban-e-
     Ahle Hadis, the Jaish-e-Mohammed/Tahrik-e-Fuqran, the Harkat-
     ul-Jehad-e-Islami, the Hizb-ul-Mujahideen and the Jammu and 
     Kashmir Islamic Front.
       The North-East outfits which have been branded as terrorist 
     organisations, under Chapter III of the ordinance which deals 
     with the terrorist organisations, are the United Liberation 
     Front of Assam (ULFA), the National Democratic Front of 
     Bodoland (NDFB), the People's Liberation Army (PLA), the 
     United National Liberation Front (UNLF), the People's 
     Revolutionary Party of Kangleipak (PREPAK), the Kangleipak 
     Communist Party (KCP), the Kanglei Yaol Kanba Lup (KYKL), the 
     Manipur People's Liberation Front (MPLF), the All-Teipura 
     Tiger Force and the National Liberation Front of Tripura. 
     Meanwhile, the government will seek to replace three 
     ordinances, including the controversial POTO in the 
     forthcoming winter session of Parliament beginning on 
     November 19.
       The Union Cabinet, at its special meeting here today, 
     decided not only on the dates of Parliament's winter session 
     but also on seeking the passage of the three ordinances.
       Briefing newspersons after the meeting, Parliamentary 
     Affairs Minister Pramod Mahajan said the government was 
     confident of getting the Opposition's support on POTO, 
     despite some of the parties having extreme reservations on 
     it. POTO seeks to fill the void created following the lapsing 
     of TADA.
       The minister was of the view that such a law was necessary 
     in the prevailing conditions in the country and would help 
     the government and the police in combating terrorism. He 
     added that the Opposition was equally concerned about 
     terrorism.
       The minister said that two other ordinances, seeking to 
     replace the ordinance on passport and the buy-back of shares 
     would also come up for consideration during the session, 
     which would have a total of 23 sittings.
       The Bill seeking to replace the ordinance on passport would 
     give the government, both the Centre and state, powers to 
     suspend the passport or the travel documents of any citizen 
     who it may suspect to be a terrorist. The ordinance signed by 
     President K.R. Narayanan, came into force from October 23. It 
     seeks to make amendments to the Indian Passport Act of 1967.
       The ordinance on buy-back of shares was promulgated 
     following a long-pending demand of the industry. It will 
     enable companies to buy-back up to 10 percent of their equity 
     every six months against the prevailing restriction of two 
     years.

     

                          ____________________