The perils of being safe

My friends will vouch for the fact that I am not one for political discussions. I guess I have been lucky enough to be able to have a blase attitude about the machinations that runs this country, or any other for that matter. I generally tend to avoid the newspapers headlines .Primarily because I am sick of the same old stories, and lets face it, when was the last time you saw a happy headline?

Anyway, the last few days has been a very difficult time for India . We have had close to 50 bomb threats. Out of which nearly 25 were detonated. What I felt like discussing was the current scenario, and ask you, my readers, your opinion about what can or cannot be done.
This new stage, and I call it a new stage in terrorism in India because the tactics have changed somewhat, now they seem more focused on putting the fear in people than killing, or maybe this is a point of view thats granted to us, thanks to the tireless and very admirable work of the Indian Police force. This new scenario poses deeper questions for our country. If you will remember, the NDA government had implemented the POTA( Prevention Of Terrorism Act) in 2002 and the first thing the UPA Government under Mr Manmohan Singh did was to repeal it. Before the POTA, there were other acts, namely the original TADA , followed briefly by the POTO act(which lasted less than a year).

Now don't get me wrong, this is not a rant against the UPA or the NDA. My questions are merely as a civilian.

With the POTA act being repealed, the Indian penal code was left with no other substitute laws to go by. Now, POTA itself is a very dangerous act. I say this because like it's American counterpart the Patriot act, it has a very wide umbrella under which anyone deemed suspicious can be taken into custody, without any charges, and kept in jail for a maximum of 6 months. Also, this allows the police and the Indian Penal code to take confessions made in police custody as evidence. Previously, a person could deny their statements made in custody.Now , this effectively means that if under sufficient mental and/or physical torture, someone confesses to something , then that's it for them.

Whether you like, dislike , support or condemn laws like these is irrelevant. There is no denying the fact that we are living in troubled times. I will try and play the devil's advocate here and explain the dangers of both sides. Recently Advani, the current leader of the BJP demanded in light of current events that POTA be reinstated. That coupled with new anti terror laws, will give immense power in the hands of the counter terrorism and police forces. To put it very dramatically, its nearly a prodigal license to kill. Many civilians have died before, and with more acts of terrorism, the government will be forced to take a strong stance. If such a law does come into play, this will destroy the lives of many civilians. But the other alternative is also a bad one. Our police forces are already ill equipped, and in our country it is especially hard to track down people, considering the wide variety in social class and lack of technology in every area. Even post the Mumbai bomb blasts, the perpetrators vanished from the city going from one village to the other. Our officers are by no means unqualified. But this situation is the equivalent of being stuck between a rock and a hard place. Either options will shape up badly for us. We, as a country have a history of communal violence, and thats also a distinct and scary possibility if this trend continues.With any counter terrorism laws like the POTA, its up to the people to apply it as they see fit. Without stronger laws, it is difficult to capture and break the backs of these networks. Unless the UN unilaterally starts acting against Pakistan, I don't see how this will stop anytime soon. Economy is the new power(relatively new) and that is the only viable way in which they can force countries to actively discourage terrorism. Although that brings other ethical issues into play, cutting funds and aid would affect more civilians albeit in another country.

But generally speaking, we as a country revel in breaking laws. From the littlest do not litter or you will be fined sign to larger ones, its a part of the mindset, dare I say that its only natural to break the laws the do not suit us. New laws, taking a harsh stance on terrorism, or even pressurizing other countries, in the long run probably wont help as much as we hope it will. Take into account the prank bomb threats that were made in the last week alone. Not only is it disturbing to think that people would find that funny, but to do something like that also shows a blatant disregard for life and ethics in general. Unless we as a nation start obeying laws, and the government decides to give the police and judicial system a major overhaul(that includes reviewing much of our own laws, which are quite ancient) , demanding more active application of the laws, we will remain a country mired in a sea of trouble.I digress, and I am by no means suggesting that common theft equates to terrorism, and however you might feel about this situation, one thing is definitely for sure. We need to meditate on this before embracing any law that makes us feel safe for the time being . I guess I am as confused as the next person regarding the current state of affairs. I frankly do not know what would be a better option among the two I mentioned above. I would like to hear what you have to say regarding this. Sure we could always take the often pragmatic view that this just seems different, its always been like that, and shrug it off, but humor me, enlighten me or criticize me, like they say- let's get it on.