My response to your write up.
Are you saying that the present laws suffice in tackling terror and it's only the lack of implementation thereof that has led to this mess?
Oh yes we are to blame for being passive and insensitive in the past. But irrespective of our cooperation and obedience to the law there are things that are essential to basic governance.
If a section of today's polity believes the current legal statute to deliver in various cases, it's only to cater to domestic political compulsions. Period
I'm sorry but the administration's attitude in dealing with terror cannot be looked into isolation i.e. along with its approach to ensuring basic internal security ,ensuring right laws are in place to speed up various judicial processes are also of relevance.
Take the ex. of MCOCA. It's foolish for us to believe that the present law suffices to deal with the menace that we see. Various cases have seen the day cause of provisions within the law. The train blasts case, the Bharat shah case where simple tapped conversations between the accused and underworld/terrorist elements are inadmissible in the present context which is not the case in MCOCA. The ability to secure more time in judicial custody et all contribute to overall quality of jurisprudence.
Take the malegaon case for instance. MCOCA is and was essential in ensuring a speedier investigation. Period.
Laws are required just as equipment if not more important than the bullet proof jackets we are all suddenly gunning for. Laws have helped. Its only when the selective application of it again to cater to "Not being tough on certain communities or being perceived as tough".
Again here the sincerity with which the law is applied is of utmost importance. I won't deny the tendancy of it being used against the weaker sections.
I ai'nt targetting any community. Remember its the hindutva brigade that filed PIL's against the application of MCOCA on the Malegaon blast accused. Its the same law that was applied to speedy disposition of justice in the train blast case.
Assume you have an intercept of X person discussing a y act of terror and this intercept cannot be used to further investigation process cause the law doesn't enable them to do so. Surely that ain't helping the morale and neither does citizen obedience and cooperation with governance agents help.
But shouldn't law take its own course given the tough times we live. I am ready to give up certain luxuries that I enjoyed. Be it being frisked daily et al.
POTA rather poto (since it was an Act) is oft quoted as being anti-minority. Okay let me not mince words its accused of being Anti- Muslim. Remember under the law its not Muslims but a large no. of Naxalities against whom the law was applied. So much for it to be perceived as anti-minority.
I am again not going to drum the importance of law as it as well cannot work in isolation. Unfortunately the only way militancy has ever been contained is through the Gun. Punjab is an example of how through brute force and aggression militancy was contained. Force has worked. Flowers, gandhigiri don't work. You ain't fighting a civilised government.
Again here its the intention behind using the force that eventually decides the outcome.
If physical aggression is used as a means to avenge, it will never work. A tit-for-tat approach has never and will not work. If the intention is to ensure further acts of terror are not carried out v/s it being mere revenge seeking, the unfortunately the gun works.
The excesses whilst ensuring these acts and the use of force has it own consequences. Like Kashmir. Excesses have been committed. But what would we choice in the environment that we live in. The end of militancy at the cost of some but yes very precious lives or consistent acts of terror against the state.