UN raises concerns over exploitative provisions of UAPA

Sites labelling of people as terrorists, reversal of burden of proof, and prolonged pre-trial detention as inconsistent with international Human Rights and legal standards

UN

In a special communication dated May 6, four United Nations (UN) Special Rapporteurs have written to the government of India about their serious concerns with respect to violation of human rights that are made possible by several provisions of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act 1967 and amendments made to it in 2019.  

The letter is written by the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism; the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention; the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression; the Special Rapporteur on the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association; the Special Rapporteur on the situation of Human Rights Defenders; Special rapporteur on independence of judges and lawyers; Special Rapporteur on minority issues; Special Rapporteur on right to privacy and Special Rapporteur on freedom or religion or belief.

The letter raises concerns in relation to designation of individuals as “terrorists”, in the context of the ongoing discrimination directed at religious and other minorities, human rights defenders and political dissidents, against whom the law has been used. It urges for a review of provisions that are incompatible with India’s obligations under international human rights law.

It calls the Government of India’s attention to their obligations under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR). The letter also raises concerns about how the definition of a ‘terrorist act’ as per UAPA differs significantly from that advanced by Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism. It calls the UAPA definition “overboard and ambiguous”. It also raises concerns about the definition of a “terrorist organisation” and “unlawful association”.

The entire communique may be read here:  

 

Trending

IN FOCUS

Related Articles

ALL STORIES

ALL STORIES