Prevention of communal and Targeted Violence (Access to Justice and Reparations) Bill, 2011

The communal violence has a recorded history of almost 300 years. The repercussions of a violence of such magnitude are colossal. Furthermore, for a person who has been a victim of such despicable circumstances has no recourse before the law, as the criminal justice system in India had enough measures to tackle with individuals being the perpetrators, but had limited legal remedies when the same action was committed by a very large group of individuals. The need to give special protection to minorities against violence is commonly accepted, as the bill purports to do.

The Bill came into being from the group experiences of the anti Muslim pogroms of Gujarat in 2002, the attempted annihilation of Christians in Kandhamal, Orissa in 2007-2008, the haunting memories of the 1984 massacre of Sikhs in Delhi and other cities, together with attacks on Dalits and Tribals over the past few decades. The government had come up with a Bill in 2005, but when it presented its version in the Rajya Sabha, it was clear that the administration was empowering governments and police rather than protecting and defending the victims. Mrs Sonia Gandhi-led National Advisory Council (NAC) drafted new Bill to tackle the issues; unfortunately the Bill itself became the center of criticism in political and social arena.

The very first definition clause, defining the Victim and Group is against the Religious and linguistic equality. The provision of violence runs on a very flawed assumption which states that “violence” can only be perpetrated by a group of people who belong to a linguistic or religious majority and not vice versa. The definitions of the offences are vaguely drafted and some includes in other act, ambit of the definition is not clear, which may vary from one instance to another.

The Bill proposes Constitution of “National Authority for Communal Harmony, Justice and Reparation”, whose powers are against federal character of constitution. Emergency provision of the Bill overpowers the Union over state.

The Bill blurs the line between civilian matters and armed forces matters and brings it within the ambit of the National Authority. The biggest lacuna which exists in the Bill is the presumption of guilt on the accused unless it can be rebutted by the accused. Section 74 however makes two fold presumptions which are against the very ethos of Criminal Justice System.

The presentation will throw the following provisions of the Bill for discussion, like—

· Definition of offences
· Constitution of National Authority for Communal Harmony, Justice and Reparation
· Ambiguous clauses
· Impact on federal structure.