The Maharashtra Special Public Security Bill: Another threat to civil liberties?
On July 25, an online public meeting was organised to discuss the newly tabled Maharashtra Special Public Security (MSPS) Bill in the recently concluded Maharashtra state assembly and its ramifications on the people of Maharashtra. The discussion on the bill was spearheaded by Advocate Mihir Desai, Advocate Vijay Hiremath and journalist and human rights defender Teesta Setalvad. The three experts referred to many dangerous aspects about the bill, exposing the rather blatant attempt of the state of Maharashtra to legitimise clamping down of dissent under the guise of dealing with the issue of “urban naxals”. The speakers dissected the bill closely, assessing its impact and risks to an active citizenry given the problematic provisions of the newly enacted Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Act, 2023 and the existing Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1962.
What is the MSPS bill?
The MSPS bill was introduced on July 11, 2024, the penultimate day of the monsoon session of the Maharashtra State Assembly (Vidhan Sabha) that concluded recently As the Maharashtra state assembly got over on July 12, the bill has not yet been passed. The bill is aimed at curbing the ‘menace of Naxalism’ in urban areas. The provisions of the proposed Bill, which allows the State to declare any organisation as ‘unlawful’ with offences categorised as cognisable and non-bailable, has raised concerns and is being dubbed the ‘urban naxal’ law.
While the processes are the same as UAPA, the Bill expands its definition of unlawful activity, bringing under its ambit everything from “being a menace to public order” and “interfering with administration of law,” to “generating fear and apprehension in public” and “preaching disobedience of law.”
The bill also states that a member of an ‘unlawful organisation takes part in meetings or activities of any such organisation or contributes or receives or solicits any contribution he shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years and shall be liable to fine upto ₹3 lakh.
The justification being put forth behind bringing such a law is that similar versions of the Public Security Act currently are currently in force in Chhattisgarh, Telangana, Andhra Pradesh and Odisha. Another reasoning that is being offered to bring in the MSPS Bill is that it will provide more effective prevention of certain unlawful activities of individuals and organisations.
The problematic aspects of the bill highlighted by the three experts:
One by one, the experts spoke about the dangers of this bill, the hidden agenda behind tabling this bill and the potential tool that it will become in the hands of the state and the police to be used against its own citizens. The discussion was moderated by Dolphy D’souza.
Advocate Mihir Desai: “This bill just wants to target dissent”
Desai began with the discussion by exploring the intentions of the state in bringing the said bill. As stated by him, the said bill essentially allows the state to declare any organisation, registered or unregistered, to be declared unlawful. The people that are associated with the organisation will then be penalised, punished and stigmatised. Thus, the bill aims to declare any organisation not liked by the state be declared unlawful.
Additionally, Desai provides that there are other seminal acts, both at the central level and the state level, which deals with all those things that this bill aims to deal with or prevent any activities that may be terrorist in nature or against the unity or integrity of India. While pointing to the unconstitutional nature of the bill by highlighting the fundamental right to form association guaranteed to the citizens of India under Article 19(1)(c) of the Constitution, which is being violated by the said bill, Desai stats that the UAPA also restricts the right to form associations by banning such organisations that are unlawful, involved in terrorist activities or commit acts that go against the security of the nation. UAPA deals with this issue, which itself is being criticised and reforms are to be brought in.
Desai then brings the discussion to the need for this particular MSPS. He explains that the MSPS bill talks about certain “frontal organisations” that are indulging in “urban naxalism”. Desai, however, also sheds light to how the existing UAPA already deals with the issue of frontal organisation of banned organisations is deal with UAPA, people have been imprisoned since the past many years, such as in the Bhima Koregaon case, under UAPA on charges of urban naxalism.
As per Desai, this bill just wants to target dissent. One may be fighting for the democratic rights, criticising any policy or demanding the implementation of a particular policies, and this law may declare you to be a menace to the society and put you in jail. Pointing to the definition of “unlawful activities” provided under Section (2) (f) (i) to (vii), Desai highlights that Section (2) (f) (i) has the phrase “menace to public order, peace and tranquillity” included in the definition. Desai emphasises that the usage of the word “menace” in the definition in itself problematic as the term “menace” is not defined anywhere in the law. The dictionary meaning of the word means, dangerous act of person, and leaves it open to the authorities to bring anything under the Act according to their discretion and penalise the ones being targeted.
Desai also unscored the important of remaining alert as while the Assembly session has ended, the said bill can be enforced through the path of an Ordinance. Referring to the upcoming state elections in the month of September and October, Desai said 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. H stated that the danger this bill brings might even be more than UAPA, as any activity that the police may deem “dangerous” or a “menace” can land you in jail.
Desai ended his speech by pointing that 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.
Advocate Vijay Hiremath: “The law is being brought to dismantle the Constitution”
Advocate Vijay Hiremath also began with his analysis of the bill by raising the question of “Why are they bringing this law when there are laws existing to deal with the issues that this bill deems to deal with?” The answer according to him was simple- to dismantle the Constitution of India. Hiremath elaborated by stating that the current government has attacked the Constitution brick by brick. He further stated that now the government wants to silence those who are following the steps of Babasaheb Ambedkar, the father of the Constitution, by prohibiting the people to “organise, agitate or educate” against the pro-corporate policies of the government. Deeming the current government to be a scared one, he said that by bringing in such anti-Constitutional laws, the state is aiming to quell any criticism or dissenting voice that goes against them.
He highlights the definitions provided under Section 2 of the bill to be extremely wide and open to interpretation, ensuring that anything and everything can be brought into its ambit. Hiremath cautioned that the current government even wants to criminalise our thoughts and ideas, and this is the step that it is taking towards the same.
Referring to the existence of criminal laws and special laws like UAPA that deal with terrorist activities, Hiremath pointed to the fact 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. Additionally, through this bill, the state want to even put people behind for trivial things that can cause the state and their agenda any harm. Similarly, Hiremath emphasised that under a criminal law, certain criminal act has to happen and there are provisions requiring a guilty conscious as well. However, 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. Disturbingly, the state government will not even be required to tell the organisation declared unlawful organisation any reasons for why it was declared so.
Hiremath then focussed the discussion on who all will be attacked under this bill. According to Hiremath from small field journalists bringing forth the issues of the people to big human rights defenders, from marginalised and subaltern castes to upper middle class, everyone that will bring distress to the pro-capitalist and pro-agenda of the government will be targeted. Another issue that Hiremath highlighted was that for any person to quality for this action under bill, it is not even necessary for the individual to be associated or be a member of the said unlawful organisation, even contributing through small donations can put one under the scanner of the state.
Referring to Section 5(1) (2) of the MSPS Bill that provides for the setting up of the “Advisory Board” to adjudicate on the actions of the State Government, police and administration, Hiremath stated that the same is just an illusion and that 90% of the cases that reach the advisory board are approved by them. However, 60% of these approved cases of detention by the advisory board are overturned by the High Courts. Based on this, he underscored that the real intention of the state government is not to actually convict individuals, but scare them. as per him, the process proving your innocence and the time that one undergoes during that is the actual punishment. Furthermore, even after overturning of the detention and the case, no one will compensate those individuals who will lose at least 6-9 months of their lives. This is what the state wants, to make people fear of being put in jail for raising their voices for the injustices of the government. Hiremath concluded his speech by stating that the people will have to continue with their struggle, against this bill and even otherwise.
Teesta Setalvad: “The bill will lead to further clamping down of civil liberties”
Setalvad began her analysis by asking the question of whether the said bill will lead to clamping down of civil liberties. Her answer to the same was “YES”. Speaking broadly about the provisions of the bill, Setalvad stated that 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. She also referred to the objectives provided by the government behind bringing the said bill, that it will handle the issue of Urban Naxals. Setalvad then stated that the term “urban naxal”, which has not been explained under any law, has become a rather slur filled term that is being repeatedly used against those raising their voices against the state and its injustices.
Setalvad them emphasised upon the other draconian laws that the state of Maharashtra has, such as the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crimes Act (MCOCA, 1999), under which several problematic prosecutions have been launched MCOCA in the past and led to illegal detentions and even imposition of death penalty as sentences after conviction. According to Setalvad, the state, by bringing in such disturbing laws in multiple numbers, are just choking any voice of dissent and criticism against the government. She further specified that the definitions of unlawful activities, menace, unlawful organisations is present in the bill under Section 2 in such a loose manner that it leaves up to the authorities and police to use, or rather misuse, the provisions against any and every dissenter.
Referring to the advisory board that the bill stipulates to be set up under Section 5 of the bill, she points that the members of the said board are not even required to be independent members. Rather, the board will be formed by the state and will potentially have people who are siding with the government. questioning the aspect of fairness that such biased members of the board will then have towards those accused under this act, Setalvad provides that these are unconstitutional laws that have been brought in based on similar laws that exists in other states, which itself have been challenged before the Courts. Elaborating on the same, Setalvad emphasised that even central laws such as the UAPA, PMLA and the recently enforced BNS legislations are already throttling our voices, and now states are bringing in such similar laws. In furtherance to this, she also related the impact that being booked under multiple similar laws will have on grant of bail to undertrials by pointing to Section 479 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. Through the said section of the BNSS, the conditions for granting statutory bail to under trials have become narrower and will now be limited to those under trials who are first-time offenders after having completed one-third of the maximum sentence. Since charge sheets often mention multiple offences, this may make many under trials ineligible for mandatory bail.
Setalvad concludes by stating that both the overall picture as well as the specific provisions in the bill and its implications paint a grim picture for the citizenry and the people’s movement. As per her, if the attempts to bring in such laws are not opposed, it will result in further erosion of constitutional principles of nature.
The path forward:
After the three speakers discussed the bill, the floor was made open to questions and comments by the audience attending the meeting online. One of the common suggestions that came out of the meeting was that it was crucial to main pressure on the state government to ensure that the tabled bill is not passed. Suggestions of peaceful assemblies, peaceful protests and social media campaigns were made. It was also suggested that the opposition leaders should be active in protesting against the bill as well as make it clear that if they are voted to power in the upcoming Maharashtra Assembly elections, they will withdraw the said bill.
Towards the end, a small resolution of appreciation was also passed by the attendees and the speaker on the death of Father D’Britto on the morning of July 25. He was 81-years-old. A Catholic priest, Father D’Britto passed away at the Holy Spirit Church at Nandakhal in Vasai, a suburb of Mumbai. He was an eminent social worker, environmental activist and Marathi writer, and had also written Subodh Bible, a translation of the Bible into the Marathi language.
The discussion may be viewed here:
