Topic: Security challenges and their management in border areas – linkages of organized crime with terrorism.
5. The unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), 1967 and the NIA act where recently amended in the wake of strengthening the security environment in the country. Analyze the changes in this context while discussing the scope and reasons for opposing the UAPA by human rights organizations. (250 words)
Reference: Indian Express
Why the question:
The question is from the portions of GS paper III, part internal security and challenges therein.
Key Demand of the question:
One has to analyse critically how under each new regime, UAPA grants greater powers to the state and has fewer safeguards for individual rights.
Directive:
Analyze – When asked to analyse, you have to examine methodically the structure or nature of the topic by separating it into component parts and present them as a whole in a summary.
Structure of the answer:
Introduction:
Start with brief introduction of the recent amendments made to the Acts.
Body:
The answer body must explain that there is an imbalance between the fundamental freedoms of citizens and interests of the State through the Act in the name of security.
It is primarily meant to combat terror and proscribe known terrorist organisations. Parliament, in the latest amendment to UAPA in July 2019, chose to proscribe individuals and their activities by paving the way to name individuals as terrorists even though they may have no affiliation with any of the 36 terrorist organisations referred to in the First Schedule of the Act. The government seeks to justify this amendment consistent with its alleged desire to effectively deal with terrorists and terrorist organisations who threaten security.
Unfortunately, the provisions of UAPA have, in the recent past, been used against those known to speak up for the oppressed, those who foster the cause of civil rights, and others who oppose the government and its policies.
Present examples.
Conclusion:
Conclude with what needs to be done.
