By Mohd Naushad Khan
The government’s decision to implement three new criminal laws from July 1 has ignited a national debate. Civil society members, lawyers, bureaucrats, and political leaders have written to the government, urging a postponement and broader consultations. Critics argue that the laws threaten individual liberty and could transform India into a police state rather than a welfare state.
In February 2024, a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) was filed in the Supreme Court seeking a stay on these laws, but the court declined to entertain it. The laws were enacted without parliamentary debate due to the suspension of numerous MPs.
Advocate Vishal Tiwari, who filed the PIL, called for an expert committee to scrutinize the laws, citing numerous shortcomings. The petition demanded a committee chaired by a former Supreme Court judge, including judges, senior advocates, and jurists, to assess the laws’ viability.
Indira Jaising, a former Additional Solicitor General, warned that the new laws could jeopardize life and liberty, eliminating safeguards previously provided under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA). “Under the new Nyay Sanhita, any police officer can prosecute for terrorism without government sanction,” she noted in an interview with Karan Thapar (The Wire).
Jaising also highlighted the potential for judicial chaos. “For FIRs filed before July 1, the old law applies. For those after, the new law applies, creating two parallel justice systems,” she explained.
Senior Supreme Court lawyer Sanjay Hegde argued that the revisions undermine procedural protections that uphold citizens’ rights. “The changes favor the state over individual liberties, allowing 90 days of police remand and restricting bail,” he said.
Advocate M.R. Shamshad criticized the increased powers given to the police, noting that the existing police authority is already exercised undemocratically against the poor and vulnerable. “The new laws perpetuate this by not holding the police accountable for wrongful actions,” he stated.
Madhurima Dhanuka, Programme Head of the Prison Reforms Programme at the Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative, expressed concerns over the lack of provisions to protect citizens’ rights in the new laws. “Despite claims of reform, the laws fall short of ensuring justice and protecting individual rights,” she said.
Dhanuka highlighted systemic issues within the criminal justice system, including the failure to inform prisoners of their arrest reasons, lack of medical examinations, and delayed legal representation.
The new laws aim to overhaul India’s criminal justice system, which includes the police, judiciary, and correctional institutions. However, critics emphasize the need to ensure that these reforms do not compromise justice or individual rights. As Martin Luther King Jr. said, “Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.”
