Statement issued by Shri Arun Jaitley,
General Secretary & Spokesperson

The Prime Minister's refusal to strengthen the Anti-Terrorism Laws of India is a National disappointment. The Prime Minister has refused to rise to the occasion. He leads a shaky coalition government, which subscribes to belief that a strong action against terrorism will weaken the Vote Bank politics of the UPA.

India has been at the receiving end of terrorism more than the United States of America and Europe and yet each of them has laws far stringent than even POTA. Their character as Liberal Democracies has not been diluted by their resolve of fighting terrorism. Terrorism is not fought with kid gloves. An anti-terrorism law perse does not fight terrorism. It prescribes a special and deterrent procedure with severe punishment for prosecuting terrorists or those who give them logistical support. It is the effect of this law that enables the guilty to be punished. The Law thus acts as a deterrent.

What is the impact of the law, which has been repealed and substituted by a soft law? The confessions of the accused are no longer admissible evidence. The insiders in the conspiracy to blast Mumbai are to give evidence against the accused; the same will be of no help to the police. The evidence two persons who have given statements that Pakistan is involved in the blasts can be used by the Prime Minister before G-8 but not in the Courts of Law in India under the UPA jurisprudence of dealing with terrorists. The accused if arrested will have to deal with a softer regime in the matter of bail. It is no secret that terrorist if released on bail will Jump Bail.

The UPA Government is more concerned with Vote Bank politics than with fighting terrorism. The determination of the Government in fighting terrorism is a suspect. Intelligence gathering has suffered. Illegal migration is creating a possibility of more human resource being available to the terrorists to recruit misguided local youth.

The Government must unveil a plan to launch a war on terror. The will appears to be lacking. It must internationalize the issue of cross border terrorism. It must strengthen the Intelligence and security apparatus to prevent terrorism. It must have a strong legislative requirement to punish terrorists.

If none of these steps are taken does the Government have an alternative mind? If there is no alternative in mind, does the Government wish that status quo continues?

(Shyam Jaju)
Headquarter Incharge