•Seema Chishti: There seems to be a lack of clarity on this at the political level. Both those who believe Inspector Sharma is a martyr and those who think Muslims are being targeted because they are Muslim, are annoyed with your government. Aren’t you falling between two stools? You don’t seem to be making statements to command the middle ground?

People say we are targeting Muslims only. They do not know that we have banned many organisations that belong to different communities. There are approximately 24 such organisations in different states that have been banned. Are we not proceeding against the Naxalites and do they not comprise members of different communities? At the National Integration Council meeting last week, the PM explained the government’s policy. There is no lack of clarity on that. We would like to see that innocents are not harassed—there is no ambiguity in our minds on that. We are not saying all Muslims are terrorists. There have been instances when Hindus have taken up arms—that does not mean that all Hindus are terrorists. We would not do anything simply on the basis of caste, community or religion.

•Raghvendra Rao: At the NIC meeting, you reiterated that the existing anti terror laws are adequate. So has the government abandoned the idea of a new anti-terror law?

Let’s look at laws like MISA, TADA, POTA which have been repealed. The Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act (MACOCA) came into existence and continues to exist in Maharashtra. I was an MP when TADA was repealed. At the time, we were in the Opposition and asked why it was being repealed. The government of the day said because it was being used to keep people behind bars for long periods. The same charge was leveled against POTA. But when POTA was repealed, we transferred some chapters from it to the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act. These included chapters on protection of innocents from terrorist acts, transfer of funds from one organisation to another or one country to another, making admissible in court the evidence collected by electronic methods, telephonic conversations, etc., the provision relating to the immunity offered to officers who acted against terrorists with a bonafide intention. The Unlawful Activities Act is a law that can be used to control terrorist activities. What we have objected to is the admissibility of a confession given to the police as evidence in court and shifting the onus from the prosecution to the defence for proving guilt, as this goes against the basic tenets of criminal jurisprudence. We have also amended the CrPC on the basis of reports from the Law Commission. As for Maharashtra, it has MACOCA; yet it is affected by terrorist attacks. The law by itself cannot help. But a law is important and should be amended when required.

... contd.