Mumbai: Activists Raise Concerns Over Maharashtra’s MSPS Law Tabled In Assembly

38

As the state government had tabled the Maharashtra Special Public Security (MSPS) Bill in the recent assembly, Mumbai-based activists have raised concerns regarding the bill. The activists alleged that the new bill is an attempt to clamp down dissent under the guise of dealing with the urban naxals.

Deputy chief minister Devendra Fadnavis had presented the MSPS bill on July 11 claiming that the bill will curb the menace of naxalism in the urban area. On Thursday Citizens for Justice and Peace, Bombay Catholic Sabha and PUCL Maharashtra organised an online meeting where activists dissected the bill, assessing its impact and risks to an active citizenry and its ramifications on the people of Maharashtra.

Advocate Mihir Desai, advocate Vijay Hiremath and social activist Teesta Setalvad indulged in a discussion in which the activists alleged that the bill wants to target dissent, it will be used to dismantle the constitution and will lead to further clamping down of civil liberties. The speakers alleged that many existing laws already deal with the issues MSPS aims to deal with. Calling the bill unconstitutional, activists allege violation of Article 19 (1)(C) which guarantees the right to form association.

Desai said, “The bill aims to declare any organisation not liked by the state be declared unlawful. The reach of this bill is very wide, you could be a part of any group asserting any kind of rights or demands, and could come under the target of this state. Furthermore, once an organisation has been declared an unlawful organisation, such declaration may only be for one year but can be renewed every year as there is no limit.”

Activists also unscored the importance of remaining alert as the assembly session has ended and the said bill can be enforced through the path of an ordinance. Referring to the upcoming state elections later in this year, activists alleged that the arbitrary powers that will be granted to the police and that state may not only be used against dissenters, but also against opposition leaders.

Hiremath said, “The current government has attacked the constitution brick by brick, now the government wants to silence those who are following the steps of Babasaheb Ambedkar, by prohibiting the people to organise, agitate or educate against the pro-corporate policies of the government. The current government is a scared one and by bringing in such anti-constitutional laws, the state is aiming to quell any criticism or dissenting voice that goes against them.”

Referring to the existence of criminal laws and special laws like UAPA that deal with terrorist activities, activists claimed that even under UAPA, certain safeguards exist and certain sanctions are required by the central government to prosecute an individual, while the same is missing in the said bill that the state wants to bring in. The allegations also added that the MSPS bill will empower the state to surpass that and even criminalise acts that the state might themselves predict will happen without there being any act or proof of attempt.

Setalvad said, “These legislations, on both the union and the state levels, are being brought in one by one with the aim of decreasing any accountability by the state and authorities towards the actions undertaken on the people of India. The term urban naxal has not been explained under any law and has become a rather slur filled term that is being repeatedly used against those raising their voices against the state and its injustices. The provisions in the bill and its implications paint a grim picture for the citizenry and the people’s movement.”

Referring to the advisory board that the bill stipulates to be set up under Section 5 of the bill, activists pointed that the members of the said board are not even required to be independent members and rather, the board will be formed by the state and will potentially have people who are siding with the government. According to them, if the attempts to bring in such laws are not opposed, it will result in further erosion of constitutional principles of nature.=



Images are for reference only.Images and contents gathered automatic from google or 3rd party sources.All rights on the images and contents are with their legal original owners.

Aggregated From –

Comments are closed, but trackbacks and pingbacks are open.