What is terrorism?
Firstly, the question arises, what does “Terrorism” means? In simple words, “Terrorism”, means the unlawful use of violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims. Terrorism comes from the word ‘Terror’ which means creating fear in the minds of the people in the country. The word “Terrorism” joins with the suffix “ism” which means in English, that, a distinctive practice, system, or philosophy, typically a political ideology. Terrorism in India is the biggest problem. India is the most diversified country in the whole world, similarly, India would be the land of the most diverse terrorism. Religious terrorism, Political terrorism, State terrorism, and any other. Unless we the civilians are more responsible and tolerant eradication of terrorism from India will be impossible.
The problem which arises in terrorism, firstly, terrorism has not been defined in any provisions of the Terrorism Act, only terrorist activities have been defined. When the word has not been defined how can it constitute terrorism? If the terrorist activities which are clearly stated constitute terrorism then other activities cannot amount to terrorism which should be mounted. Secondly, an issue arises that the Government still cannot tackle the problem of terrorism due to their policies, laws enacted, and their relationships. Terrorist organizations are made so powerful and there is still no proper law that has been enacted to govern terrorism or to improve the future prospects and danger. And due to this, the most immediate and measurable impact of terrorism is physical and direct economic destruction from waging war, abetting against Government, smuggling activities, murder, kidnapping, abduction, bomb blasting, etc this leads to major crimes. The impact of terrorism is always negative on the economy.
Laws & Judicial Interpretation
The question arises why there is no tough “Anti-Terrorism Legislation” made in India and secondly why the word “Terrorism” is not been defined in the Act. While it is difficult to precisely define what is meant by ‘terrorism’. The Indian National Security Guard Act defines a ‘Terrorist.’ Earlier the first Act which enacted was- The Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA). It is normally designed to deal with associations and activities that questioned the territorial integrity of India, but, it remains no stringed laws to govern terrorism. The Act has all along been worked holistically as such and is completely within the purview of the Central list in the 7th Schedule of the Constitution. The second major Act that came into force was the Terrorist & Disruptive Activities Act (TADA). This Act was more stringed than UAPA, and it was designed to deal with terrorist activities in India.
However, later the provisions of this Act came to be misused and abused. It lapsed in 1995. Then, the Prevention Of Terrorists Act (POTA) was enforced. But this Act was also repealed. Another major Anti-terrorist law in India is ‘The Maharashtra Control Of Organised Crime Act (MCOCA).’ This law is designed to look into the crimes rising in Maharashtra, especially, Mumbai, due to the underworld. POTA does only mention organized crimes but MCOCA not only mentions this but also, the ‘ promotion of insurgency’ as a terrorist act. To prove a person guilty under POTA lies on the prosecution while under the Maharashtra law person is presumed guilty unless he is able to prove his innocence. MCOCA does not stipulate prosecution of police officers found guilty of its misuse. But POTA did.
Presently, in India, Acts govern for Terrorism are UAPA only. And states like Maharashtra and Kerala have made their own laws, mainly: MCOCA and KCOCA (Kerala Control Of Organised Crime Act). The Unlawful And Prevention Act, which is governing is not sufficient to regulate terrorist activities. In terms, of our sovereignty, unity, and integrity, and our feeling of nationalism, terrorism strikes at each one of them.
The UAPA does not define the word ‘ terrorist’ and ‘ terrorism’ in its definition clause it defines ‘ terrorist act,’ after the Amendment. The word ‘Terrorism’ has been defined in the UK. The Terrorism Act is the first of a number of general Terrorism Acts passed by the Parliament of the United Kingdom
In 2013, a set of amendments were introduced in UAPA which penalized financial activities related to terrorism. First, it introduced the concept of ‘offenses threatening economic security’ within the scope of a terrorist act under Section 5, including the smuggling of ‘high-value counterfeit currency. Since this is a recent amendment, it has not been judicially interpreted in any significant manner. It is thus, not yet clear under what circumstances counterfeiting is already an offence under the IPC.
Terrorism has several consequences which the country India is facing. There should be stringent laws to be made especially for the areas of Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Jammu & Kashmir, and other areas. So, it becomes very necessary in a country like India that if the laws regarding terrorism are enacted and it will be so tough that the culprit is brought he cannot be scot-free just because of some loopholes. When our neighboring nation Pakistan can make stringent laws then why can’t India?
Save your time!
We can take care of your essay
- Proper editing and formatting
- Free revision, title page, and bibliography
- Flexible prices and money-back guarantee
Terrorism is, however, threatening people in order to achieve religious political, or ideological objectives. In India, the past years have established so many terrorist organizations which make intimate to the Government or to societies. The question arises why this is happening in India. Yet, what the Government is doing? Why they cannot find still a solution to this problem? The answer to these questions still remains unanswered and due to this problem, our Country is lacking behind. The most common roots of terrorism are globalization, culture clashes, etc.
The 26/11 Mumbai attack was one of the worst terror attacks India ever faced. The attack lasted for 4 days. 164 people were killed and 308 were injured. Terrorists captured Nariman's house, Hotel Taj, and Hotel Oberoi Trident. Apart from these Chhatrapati Shivaji Terminus, Leopold Café Cama Hospital, Metro Cinema, and in a lane behind the Times of India office. One attacker Ajmal Kasab was arrested and nine others were killed by police and NSG commandos in a long battle. The attack was conducted by Pakistan-based militant organization Lashkkar-e-Taiba and the mastermind was Hafiz Saeed.
Mohammed Ajmal Amir Kasab v. State of Maharashtra was a Pakistani national, who earned himself five death penalties and an equal number of life imprisonment for multiple crimes. Some of the major crimes were waging and abetting war against the Government of India; criminal conspiracy to commit murder committing murder of a number of persons; attempt to murder with common intention; criminal conspiracy and abetment; abduction for murder; and causing explosions. He and his comrades entered India illegally, bought arms and ammunition fired indiscriminately, and killed hundreds. Kasab was tried with two other accused persons and 9 dead accused and 5 wanted to be accused for various offenses under-
- Indian Penal Code, 1860
- Arms Act, 1959
- Unlawful Activities Prevention Act, 1967
- Explosives Act,1884
- Explosives Substances Act, 1908
- Passport Act, 1920
- Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 198
- Railways Act, 1989
- Customs Act, 1962
- Foreignness Act, 11946
The accused Kasab was awarded five death sentences, five sentences of life imprisonment and 66 years and one month of rigorous imprisonment, and a fine of Rs. 136900. All the sentences were confirmed by the High Court and the Supreme Court. Kasab’s petition for Presidential clemency was turned down and he was executed.
Geelani Afsan, Afzal & Shaukat's Hussain Guru v State of Delhi were proclaimed offenders and were said to be the leaders of the banned terrorist organization known as Jaish-e-Mohammed. The charges were framed under various sections of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, Prevention of Terrorism Act, 2002, and Explosives Substances Act by the designated session court. Geelani was acquitted of all charges except one under section 12 of IPC for which he was convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years and to pay a fine. His acquittal blew a gaping hole in the prosecution’s version of the Parliament attack. The other two were upheld with death sentences under sections 302 and 120B of IPC and section 3(2) of POTA. They were also sentenced to life imprisonment and a fine. Shaukat Hussain was released nine months prior to his official date of release because of his good conduct. Afzal Guru was hanged on February 2013.
Hafiz Saeed v State was arrested in 2008 for 26/11 and on November 2017 he was released. As Lahore High Court had decided to release him as there were no charges against Saeed and the decision to free him was within the bounds of the law.
There is a problem of speedy justice. As our Judiciary is independent it should also try fair and speedy justice. It is truly said ‘Justice delay is Justice Denial.’ Kasab case was only the case in history whose judgment doesn’t takes years to come. But the Afzal Guru case took 12 years to uphold his death. Also recently Hafiz's case, in which he had been arrested in the 26/11 attack in 2008, he was released just because there were no charges to be framed. This decision of the Judiciary is vague. Just because of a small thing he walks out freely. This is the problem with our Country there are no such stringed laws to govern terrorism. As the days are passing terrorism is going on increasing. How Judiciary led Saeed to be free and continue with his evil acts? If a country is implementing terrorism laws then how far such terrorists are released? This means that our laws are not strict to regulate such acts.
The major problem of the Judiciary is backlog of the cases. These activities are serious to the people and societies and immediately strict actions are to be taken but our judicial system doesn’t lead it to be. Though their implementation of new laws in UAPA and Special Investigation Agencies has been established then also it is lacking somewhere. That’s the reason after implementation also there is the raising of this problem.
Again the question arises of how the Government reacts to terrorism. The answer to the question is their response is episodic. Soon after an attack, the government appears to take short-term measures. ‘India lacks a coherent strategic response to terrorism’, there is no doctrine, and most of the responses our useless. If we look at the other countries they have been provided with tight security, proper training been given they know how to deal with the terrorists and therefore, they are in a safer zone. But our people are not in a safer zone. What the Government is doing in protecting the citizens of the Country? If they are doing something, why it is taking such a long time? When they will take action when the whole country will go to the downside?
Stuck on your essay?
