news details |
|
|
| Situation doesn't permit revocation of PSA, says Omar | | In the interest of security of J&K | | Rustam
Jammu, Oct 2: The situation in Jammu and Kashmir is alarming. It would be dangerous to revoke the Public Safety Act (PSA) at this point of time, as its revocation at this juncture would not be in the interest of the security of the state. This was the crux of the written reply of Chief Minister Omar Abdullah to the question of CPI-M leader and MLA from Kulgam, MY Tarigami. Omar Abdullah, who also holds the Home portfolio, replied to the CPI-M MLA's query on Tuesday.
"In the last five years -- (from 2009-July 2013 -- 1257 persons have been detained under PSA in J&K (1,117 people from Kashmir and 140 from Jammu division)…66 people from Kashmir have been re-detained due to their 'deep involvement in terrorist, subversive or disruptive activities or other heinous crimes, in the interest of security of the state'. The Act has sufficient inbuilt safeguards including reference to Advisory Board set up under the Act to confirm or recommend revocation of the detention order leaving no scope for its misuse or arbitrary application by any authority…There was no need or proposal to revoke PSA…Jammu and Kashmir PSA, 1978, has been amended last year to ensure that no citizen under the age of 18 years is detained under the law. As per the amendment, clause (f) has been inserted after clause (e) in sub section 3 of Section 8 which provides that no citizen of India who has not attained the age of 18 years can be detained under clause (a) and (a-i) of Section 8 of the Act. In view of these additional safeguards there is no proposal or need for revocation of J&K PSA, 1978," the written statement of the Chief Minister, among others, said.
Omar Abdullah needs to be appreciated for his stand on the PSA. But still the question remains: How is it that he and his uncle Mustafa Kamaal and senior colleagues like Lok Sabha MP Mehboob Beg condemn the AFSPA and demand its revocation? He cannot have a dual approach towards legislations that help the government rein in and punish those deeply involvement in "terrorist, subversive or disruptive activities or other heinous crimes". He would do well to appreciate the Army and security forces who believe that they need the AFSPA to check the activities he himself referred to in the Legislative Assembly. Or he should say that the PSA, like the AFSPA, is also draconian. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
