The New Criminal Laws And The Exploitative State
The new criminal laws have come into force from 1st July 2024. As it happened during the process of enactment, questions have once again been raised about the hastiness with which the laws were passed without due deliberations in the parliament. It is undeniably a truth that the laws were enacted during a period when 146 MPs were suspended from parliament. But these are mere objections about lack of parliamentary deliberations and tit-bits of changes demanded by the opposition in the whole system of the laws. Such unending parliamentary squabbles recur time and again on various issues. But the far more important question inthis regard is have there been any demand from any quarter whatsoeverthat the people as a whole should have been consulted before such a bigoverhaul of the whole criminal justice system? Neither did the ruling orthe opposition parties or even the social welfare activists of the NGOsraise such a question nor does the bourgeois system of the rich andpowerful have any such mechanism in its system, or have any intention tofulfil such a necessity. But, for the common masses?the workers,peasants, poor and the downtrodden such as the dalits, adivasis andother oppressed minority nationalities?this is the question of utmostimportance. It is a fact that all these sections bear the main brunt ofoppression of these laws against them. Hence the foremost question iswhat does this new laws forebode for them, the majority of theseoppressed and exploited in our society?
None other than the Home Minister Amit Shah himself during enactmentof these laws in the Modi 2.0 regime said with much hype, taking creditfor these new laws, that for a country which is becoming self-reliant(Atmanirbhar Bharat) the introduction of these new criminal laws is animportant step to free the people from the archaic, colonial past; theselaws are human-centric, etc?. .
Of course the government has shed off one aspect of colonial legacy.The names of the laws have been changed giving Indianisednames?.Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita in place of the colonial-era Indian PenalCode, Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita in place of earlier CrPC andBharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam for Indian Evidence Act. But that is a veryminor point with which they are trying to hoodwink the people.
Everyone knows that the earlier Indian Penal Code was first enactedin 1860, the CrPC in 1882 and the Evidence Act in 1872?all during theBritish rule. Although later amendments were introduced in independentIndia but the main corpus of colonial era laws continued. Hence if AmitShah's claims are to be true indeed then the new laws must make adecisive break from the repressive laws of the colonial past thatcontinued till yesterday and usher in a new system of pro-people laws.But many experts in this field have openly contradicted him, saying thatout of the 511 sections in the IPC only 24 sections have been removedand 23 new have been introduced and further 95% of the CrPC has beenmerely copy-pasted into the new laws.
Delving further into some of the important laws this is fullyconfirmed. Among various provisions of the criminal laws detentionwithout trial has always been a big curse for the masses. Among thedetention laws even particularly the Sedition Law (Section-124A) was amuch criticized law in British India. It was a prime weapon of thecolonial state against those fighting for independence during theBritish rule. The continuity of that law in independent India has alsobeen criticized by many including the Supreme Court. But in spite of allcriticisms, it was retained even after independence. The BJP governmentalso during its last 10 years of rule repeatedly foisted the Seditionlaw against any form of criticism and dissent, which compelled the SC toput on hold the application of this draconian law, pressurizing thegovernment for its abolition forthwith. Now with the new laws the BJPgovernment has removed the infamous Sedition law but on the other it hasbrought the same draconian provisions through the backdoor in Section152 of the BNS by further expanding its vague terms susceptible tomisuse viz, endangering sovereignty or unity and integrity of India,putting these in the same category with secession or armed rebellion orsubversive activities that has life imprisonment as punishment.
Then there is another oppressive, undemocratic law from the Britishera ? Section 144 ? which was used by the British rulers to curtailassemblies and protests has been used all these years even inindependent India. The class conscious workers or any section of masswho have been in struggle know that on one hand the constitutiondeclares freedom of assembly and agitation while on the other it armsthe governments with different sections of law prohibiting exercise ofthese rights on the alibi of maintaining law and order. Almost in everystruggle of workers and peasants they face this. In fact many stategovernments like Assam, Uttar Pradesh government keep declaring Section144 in various regions every six month to prevent assemblies or protestsin any form. If workers demanding resolution of their grievances stage apeaceful sit-in or tool-down protest the employer on the alibi ofoccupying his property often foists a case of criminal trespass underSec 441 of the IPC calling in the police to forcibly evacuate them. Evensitting near the factory gate the workers have to face court-order forevacuation on the allegation of hampering movement of goods anddisturbing law and order. While the employers can close factories, kickout workers from their jobs at will, even openly employ bouncers tointimidate workers, the state with its police force and magistrateshound the leaders to scuttle the workers' agitation for long-standingdemands, for the workers this is the reality of right to protest,assemble or agitate. The whole constitutional declaration of democraticrights to express one's protest in form of a movement or agitation turnsout in reality to be nothing but a hollow promise biased in favour ofthe capitalists and landlords. All these anti-worker, anti-peopleprovisions have also been continued in the new laws.
In 2014 an environmental activist Priya Pillai questioned the Centralgovernment for allocation of coal reserves in the forests of MadhyaPradesh to a joint venture company of Essar and Aditya Birla Groupgiving environmental clearance to 70 projects worth 1.5 lakh crorerupees within a short period of just 20 days, doubting shady dealsbehind such speedy clearances. The company brought in a charge ofcriminal defamation, another colonial era law which is often used by thepowerful and corporates to stifle counter opinions and criticisms. Thislaw of criminal defamation earlier in the IPC is now included in Section356 of the BNS. In spite of criticism against this law the LawCommission of India clung to it in favour of its continuation.
Further there is no cause for thinking that these three criminal lawsconstitute the whole picture of the criminal justice system of theIndian state and its government. Apart from these there are specialanti-people acts used time and again like the UAPA, NSA, ESMA, AFSPA.State level Uttar Pradesh Control of Goonda act in UP, Uttarakhand,Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime act etc? .
These are numerous special acts which are purportedly meant to beimplemented against specific nature of crimes. Even here what we see isthere are numerous instances of application of NSA and ESMA againstgovernment employees agitating for redressal of their grievances.Recently the Goonda act has been invoked against leaders of Dolphincompany workers struggling for minimum legitimate benefits and otherworker leaders supporting them in Uttarakhand. By imposing it anarrested person can be kept in custody without trial for one year. Thenthere has been recent laws like Uttar Pradesh Recovery of Damages toPublic and Private Property Act to imprison and fine protesters oncharges of damaging government or private property which has beenapplied against anti-CAA protesters. The AF(SP)A continues to be a usedfor oppression of various backward nationalities. These special lawshave given the state so much of unbridled powers that time and againthey have often been thrust upon workers, peasants, minorities,oppressed nationalities, dalits or any other mass protests, in order tocrush the movements.
Further based on their communal agenda the Modi-Shah government hasalso brought in a series of repressive laws on cow slaughter, beefeating, inter-faith marriage which give wide powers to the police andhave also been used to target minorities, dalits and the new generationyouth where inter-religious mixing has normally become prevalent in thenatural course of progress of society.
For the people and particularly the workers-peasants and other poorand downtrodden people, bearing the brunt of such a criminal justicesystem has been a harrowing experience for them. Facts reveal that therehas been rampant use of draconian laws and ultimately very few number ofpeople have been proved to be guilty. A data compiled by the NationalCrime Records Bureau (NCRB) shows: "A total 356 cases of sedition ? asdefined under Section 124 were registered and 548 persons arrestedbetween 2015 and 2020. However, just 12 persons arrested in sevensedition cases were convicted in this six-year period." Then 97.2% ofUAPA accused jailed for long periods and were eventually acquitted. ThePUCL study found that 8,371 persons were arrested under the UnlawfulActivities Prevention Act between 2015 and 2020, while only 235 wereconvicted under the draconian anti-terror law in the same period.
Then innumerous people, mostly these common, poor, downtroddenrotting in prison do not even reach the trial stage to get justice. Ason November 2023, over 30 lakh criminal cases are pending for more than10 years. As a result of growing backlog of cases for a long period,always a large number of under-trials persist in this country. As ofDecember 2021, India's prisons housed over 5.5 lakh prisoners, with anoverall occupancy rate of 130%. The vast majority--77% of theseprisoners were under-trials (4.3 lakh), while the remaining 23% wereconvicts and detenues. Among these the masses of workers poor peasantsincluding other poor people, dalits, adivasis and minorities are maximumin number incarcerating in jails without trial for years. While whenthey demand justice against any crime on them they are denied theminimum of protection. Repeated instances of inaction on registeringFIRs, application of the SC/ST Atrocities Act, vengeful action on themin turn have been reported from different quarters of the country. Eventhe jails bear testimony of caste discrimination and humiliation amongthe inmates.
Now the Modi-Shah government, keeping all these intact, has furthertopped it with more stringent measures and wider discretionary power tothe state in the new laws. Bail has been made harder. The BNSS allows upto 15 days of police custody, which can be staggered in parts during theinitial 40 or 60 days of the 60 or 90 days period of judicial custody,denying bail. Even bail will be denied from now on to someone detainedfor half the maximum imprisonment period facing multiple charges.
FIR has been made non-mandatory. In numerous cases all these yearsthe poor and also downtrodden sections like dalits are denied recordingof their complaints and registration of FIR. Now it has been given asanction by this new law. The police officer in charge may with theprior permission of a senior officer conduct a preliminary enquiry todetermine whether a prima facie case for proceeding in the matter existsor not within a period of 14 days. Moreover certain new provisions havebeen introduced on terrorism, mob lynching, organized crime, withfurther special powers to the state for more stringent terms ofpunishment. Thus the state has unilateral powers to arrest, detain analleged accused for long periods without trial, while for a commoncitizen?a worker, peasant, dalit, or any poor people getting theircomplaints recorded as FIR or making the police act has been madefurther difficult. The class character of the state, the authoritariannature of the ruling system vis-à-vis the common masses have beenfurther strengthened.
Of course time to time there have been criticisms against misuse oflaws, even demands for abolition of draconian laws. Many such demandshave been made even from the days of independence. But after certainamount of commotion especially during exposure of blatant instances ofapplication of such laws gradually things get covered up. The state andits ruling class and the party in power highlight the heinousness ofsome other incident of crime and push forward the necessity of adoptingstill harsher, unilateral laws. Like just after independence during thehoneymoon phase what did Nehru say on sedition law-- "Now so far as I amconcerned that particular Section (124A IPC) is highly objectionable andobnoxious and it should have no place both for practical and historicalreasons, if you like, in any body of laws that we might pass. The soonerwe get rid of it the better." However, he dithered on this as hisgovernment not only reimposed the sedition law through the firstamendment in the Constitution in 1951 but also strengthened it by addingtwo expressions ? "friendly relations with foreign state" and "publicorder" ? as grounds for imposing "reasonable restrictions" on freespeech. Presently the BJP government abolished the Sedition law ondirections of the Supreme Court but only to bring it again under thegarb of a new provision. Thus the stranglehold of the state on thepeople has gone on tightening. And these laws have been most often usedagainst mass protests and agitations. Because in spite of allcriticisms, all hullabaloo by the opposition and the press, ultimatelythis system of rule is a bourgeois democracy, that serves the interestof the big bourgeois and also the landlords and other exploiters, thepolicies of exploitation and oppression of these ruling classes. Thelaws are tools expressing the will and interests of the bourgeoisie, thelandlords for running this exploitative system. The criminal procedures,the justice system is part of the bourgeois state that plays the role ofcontrolling and keeping the masses subservient to the power of this rulewith all its facades of democracy and democratic rights.
In this context it must be remembered that the big bourgeois and biglandlords of this country ascended to power not through a process ofdemocratization from below. Without shaking up the whole colonialoppressive system it was only through transfer of power from theimperialist rulers that it took the reins of the state in its hand. Andfurther down the lane with power in its hand in this era of imperialismthese classes are ruling this society by advancing through slow reformsfrom above. Hence our society has capitalist relations along withremnants of the old feudal society. Therefore the state and its laws arenot only used to keep its contradictions with the arch-enemy of thebourgeois--the exploited working class and rural proletariat in check,until the working class brings forward a bigger challenge to the systemas a whole. Side by side the laws and the justice system discriminateagainst and oppress lower castes, dalits, adivasis and backwardnationalities. Thus in keeping with the interests of the ruling classesthrough this state of theirs and its laws and the justice machinerythese discriminations and hence oppression persist.
Crossing the limits set by the ruling classes, sometimes a particularparty in government may have tried to take a course on their own likeenactment of certain laws that isn't compatible with the interests ofthe ruling classes as such. Then a resultant contradiction arisesbetween the interests of the ruling class and the party in power. Butultimately with time such a law or directive not in consonance with theinterests of the ruling classes are either dumped or modified. Or evensometimes there has been instances of governments going slow onformulating some laws urgently demanded by the bourgeois. In that casethe ruling classes turns the heat on the ruling party in government torealise their demand. Such instances prove the truth that it is theruling classes, with the big bourgeois leading along with landlordclasses, which decide the path of running of the state. It is theirstate. Thus the retrospective tax laws passed by the Congress governmentagainst Vodafone and Cairns in 2012 had to be scrapped under persistingpressure from the bourgeois. While on the other hand going slow onadoption of various steps of the new economic reforms programme in spiteof the demands of hasty implementation viz. the change in labour laws,by the big bourgeois cost the Manmohan Singh led Congress party itsgovernment in 2014, as the big bourgeois by then accusing the Manmohangovernment of ?policy paralysis' had propped up Modi led BJP as theirmore trusted manager to be promoted for governmental power. Thus theruling classes are the real bosses who decides things to be done by thegovernments.
Now coming back to the discussion of the new Criminal Laws here alsothere is endorsement of the ruling classes, without which it would nothave been possible at all. Isn't it a stark truth that up till now inspite of all kinds of criticisms and objections about Sedition law,UAPA, AF(SP)A or many other repressive state laws has there hasn't beenany demand from the bourgeoisie and their media for complete abolitionof these laws? Has there been any step towards a decisive curbing ofwide powers of the police? Rather all these are been strengthenedfurther in the garb of "human-centric" Indianised laws. Because this isthe necessity of the bourgeoisie with the big bourgeoisie at its helmand also the landlords, rural and regional elites, the upper castepowerful sections and the big oppressor nationalities who still wieldquite an amount of power. It is the necessity of these exploiters for amore and more authoritarian state. It is necessary to continueunhindered with their exploitation and oppression of the masses. Only aproletarian state with the working class in power can bring about such atotal change and abolition of repressive laws. Only a proletarian statecan ensure such laws compatible with real democracy for the vastmajority of the masses. Of course not for the small section ofexploiters.
Comments:
No Comments for View