New Delhi: In the absence of the 97 opposition MPs who have been suspended, the Lok Sabha on Wednesday (December 20) passed the three new criminal Bills.The three new Bills include the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Bill to replace the Indian Penal Code, 1860; the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam Bill to replace the Indian Evidence Act, 1872; and the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Bill to replace the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973.The Bills were first taken up for passage and consideration on Tuesday, hours after 49 opposition MPs were suspended from the Lok Sabha following protests in the house demanding a statement from Union home minister Amit Shah on the security breach in parliament last week.On Wednesday, as the debate continued in the afternoon, it was paused for a few minutes as parliamentary affairs minister Pralhad Joshi came in to announce the suspension of two more opposition MPs.Since December 14, a total of 143 opposition MPs have been suspended.A total of 35 MPs participated in the debate over the three new criminal Bills over the course of the two days (Tuesday and Wednesday).The debate saw the participation of MPs from the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and parliamentarians from parties friendly to it like the Biju Janata Dal, Rashtriya Lok Janshakti Party and the YSR Congress Party, who also supported the legislation.Only MPs from the All India Majlis-e-Ittehadul Muslimeen (AIMIM) and the Shiromani Akali Dal (SAD) raised concerns about the Bills bringing in a “police state” giving the government unbridled power.SAD MP Harsimrat Kaur raised the absence of the opposition during her speech and said that the laws will give “unbridled powers to the police” and create an authoritarian state, adding that powers are being given without “any checks and balances”.Also read: MPs’ Job Is to Ask for Accountability. Shutting Them Down Is No Answer.“These arbitrary powers are against liberty, democracy, dissent and opposition. Here is a living example that such an important Bill is being discussed, which should be in a fair and transparent manner with everybody allowed to air their views, and here there is only the ruling party and a handful of us opposition who are being allowed to say what we want,” she said.“This is not the way for such an important Bill to be passed.”SAD (Amritsar) MP Simranjit Singh Mann also said that this was an “undemocratic practice of debating these Bills because the opposition is not present.”“They are also unconstitutional; again, because the opposition is not present and I propose that these Bills come up when the whole opposition is present and it is properly debated.”Mann’s speech was cut off when he raised the killing of Sikh activist Hardeep Singh Nijjar in Vancouver, Canada on June 19 and referred to it as an important “criminal [matter]”. The chair, Rajendra Agarwal, said Mann was “deviating” from the topic and asked the next speaker to start speaking.AIMIM MP Asaduddin Owaisi also opposed the Bills and said that they would increase the powers of the police and the government in the name of bringing in reforms.“If Bhagat Singh and Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi were alive, they would say that this is the Rowlatt Act. The government has to answer who are the actual successors of Macaulay,” he said.He also raised concerns about the clauses of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) being included in the laws and said that minorities, Dalits and Adivasis are facing disproportionate convictions and detentions, but laws are being reformed to favour the powerful.“Muslims, Dalits, Adivasis are languishing in jail. They are reforming the laws for the powerful. How will the poor benefit from this? The cure [the new laws] is deadlier than the disease,” he said.In his reply to the house at the close of the discussion on Tuesday, Shah said that the new laws have been drafted keeping in mind the spirit of the Indian constitution.“Prime Minister Modi promised from the ramparts of the Red Fort that the country will be liberated from colonial laws, and the home ministry has sought to do that. These [old] laws were to govern a dependent country, but the new laws have been framed keeping in mind the core values of our constitution – individual freedom, human rights and equal treatment for all,” said Shah.In a veiled reference to the opposition and the Congress, Shah said that those who had raised objections saying that there is not much change in the new laws, need to understand the laws as Indians.“For the first time, laws are going to be made according to the spirit of our constitution under the leadership of Modi ji. I am proud to have changed these three laws after 150 years.”He continued: “Some people used to say that we do not understand them; I tell them that if you keep your mind as an Indian, then you will understand. But if there is Italy in your mind, you will never understand.”Shah said that for the first time, terrorism has been defined in criminal laws.“We had promised to ensure zero tolerance to terror. There was no definition of terrorism. I am astonished at how some people are trying to defend and save the lives of terrorists in the name of ‘human rights’.“Terrorism is the biggest threat to human rights. Remember, this is neither the rule of the British nor of the Congress. This is the rule of BJP and Modi ji. No arguments to save terrorists will be entertained here. To ensure that it is not misused, we have defined it,” he said.Also read: As Laws Expand Their Reach in India, Political Freedoms ShrinkShah also said that the new legislations remove sedition and that “rajdroh” (sedition) has been replaced with “deshdroh” (anti-patriotic acts). He said that no one will be penalised for criticising the government, but will face punishment for acting against the country.“This is an independent country, nobody will be sent to jail for criticising the government, but you cannot say anything against the country or do anything against the interests of the country. If you harm the flag or the property of the country, you will be sent to jail – harsh punishment for harming the country,” he said.He also said that there is a “misunderstanding” on the increased period of police custody from 15 days to 90 days.“This is a misunderstanding. The total police custody is 15 days. There are some cases where the accused get admitted to a hospital during the initial days to avoid police custody. It is to address such practices,” he said.Responding to concerns raised by Owaisi that the new laws would turn the country into a “police state” by giving unbridled powers to the police and the state, Shah said that the “these laws are being made so there is no police state.”The three new Bills were first introduced in the Lok Sabha on August 11.They were then referred to a parliamentary standing committee, which published its report on November 10. The report hailed the move to bring in the new Bills and recommended some changes.Subsequently, the Bills were withdrawn and reintroduced during the winter session on December 12.Writing in The Wire, G. Mohan Gopal noted that even in their redrafted form, the Bills “weaponise the police and the criminal justice system to give the political leadership at all levels – centre, state and local – even greater opportunity to abuse the criminal justice system for political gain through selective, targeted and politically biased prosecution against ideological and political rivals.”Some of the changes brought in the second draft include a pullback of the expansion of the crime of terrorism beyond the existing definition in the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (UAPA); and a circumscribed definition of “petty organised crime”.The government has also dropped its earlier proposal that life imprisonment in all cases shall be “imprisonment for remainder of a person’s natural life”, clarified punishment for ‘culpable homicide not amounting to murder’ as well as the definition of community service, and brought in a distinction between mental illness and mental unsoundness, among other changes.The parliamentary standing committee’s recommendation that adultery be maintained as a gender-neutral crime has not been included in the new version of the legislations.In addition, other committee recommendations that have not found a place are that non-consensual sexual acts covered by IPC Section 377 continue to be criminalised; grounds be provided by the executive for the commutation of sentences; and that a special provision be included to protect healthcare workers.
