Sumedha, Correspondent
Justice in India has become a ball room for many recently. As the world celebrates the World Day for International Justice, the irony is hard to miss. Behind the pomp and circumstance, the country’s justice system remains a farce, a privilege only for the rich and powerful, leaving the marginalized to decay. The recent implementation of the criminal laws on the 1st of July this year was acknowledged as a revolutionary step, alongside many loopholes identified by advocates, legal experts and critics, received with mixed reactions.
In an effort to makeover and eliminate some archaic and outdated British laws, the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, and the Bharatiya Sakshya Act replace the Indian Penal Code, Criminal Procedure Code, and Indian Evidence Act, respectively. The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita promises a more victim-centric approach, emphasizing on fast-track courts and speedy trials with stricter punishments. But, there has also been a huge backlash by many legal experts pointing out its setbacks. One of which being that the new law enforcement powers lack sufficient oversight, raising concerns about potential abuse. Safeguards and protections for citizens have been overlooked, creating a recipe for misuse and potential violations of civil liberties.
For instance, the extended detention period from 15 to 90 days raises serious red flags and smokescreen. This increased authority for police could lead to a rise in malpractice and abuse of power.Critics have also raised concerns about the revised Sedition Law under Section 150 of the BNS. The new provisions appear ‘Draconian’ (overly punitive), with overly harsh, with stricter punishments and tight deadlines for legal processes and investigations. Additionally, experts question the redundancy of including terrorism as a general offense when it’s already addressed by specific, existing legislation.
The debate surrounding these new laws extends beyond legal concerns. Opposition leaders have also argued that the government’s swift passage of the legislation through Parliament bypassed crucial democratic processes. They point out that a significant portion of Lok Sabha members were suspended during the vote, raising questions about legitimacy. It was passed during a time when 25% of the members of Lok Sabha were suspended and had no opportunity to participate in the debate. As a result, stakeholders, those potentially impacted by the laws, were reportedly not consulted.Specific provisions within the legislation have drawn particular scrutiny. These include sections related to terrorism, accidents, marital disputes, and stricter penalties for certain offenses, including a potential reinterpretation of Section 377 of the IPC.
Critics argue that these sensitive areas require a more comprehensive and inclusive discussion before implementation.It is also observable that these laws also call for immediate cybersecurity measures for an impregnable and encrypted cyberspace for legal procedures alone, adding to its complexity, as electrical records are easier to modify, track and misuse.Nevertheless, in response to widespread protests from lawyer groups across India regarding the recently implemented criminal justice reforms, the Bar Council of India (BCI) issued a statement on June 26th. The BCI acknowledged these concerns and, based on promises from the national Home Minister to consider legitimate changes, called on all lawyer associations to hold off on any demonstrations.The BCI intends to initiate discussions with the federal government to address legal issues surrounding the new laws.
They’ve also requested input from lawyer associations and experienced legal professionals to pinpoint problematic provisions for productive discussions.On the other side of the spectrum, there have also been challenges and pleas from the ruling party and former members of the parliament as well. Subramanian Swamy is an Indian politician, economist, and former Union Cabinet Minister. He is a prominent figure in Indian politics and has held various positions.
Taking into consideration Subramanian Swamy’s preamble push, his proposal to remove the words “secular” and “socialist” from India’s Preamble has ignited controversy. While some see merit in discussing secularism, critics argue it overshadows the critical issue of equal justice. They fear Swamy’s vision could worsen marginalization and social inequalities. Swamy argues these terms, inserted during the 1976 Emergency, violate the Constitution’s “basic structure.” He claims the framers rejected these concepts and that Parliament overstepped its authority by adding them.It has been critiqued that the code’s emphasis on speedy trials and harsh punishments is a mere smokescreen, distracting from the systemic issues that have long plagued India’s justice system. However, in the eyes of the common man, the new criminal laws deploy technology in the hands of the enforcers, as well as the citizens, leaving both in a space of confidence and security, with an expectation of offenses and harassments to be reported in real-time, with justice served swiftly.
We, as common man in the country are put out to see many useful amendments and overhauls in the new criminal procedures, alongside many criticisms.Some of the ways that any further amendments and revisions positively reinforce justice and fair judgement have to further encompass prioritizing the marginalized with special courts, addressing issues specific to marginalized communities with equal priority. Furthermore, fast-track justice has to be streamlined with court procedures and tackling backlogs. Technology leveraged to increase efficiency and reduce delays is also seen to be promised by the new laws, enriching the belief of a stronger, easier, and fair treatments to victims.In conclusion, it is crucial to reaffirm our commitment to pursuing justice, equality, and human rights for all as we commemorate this day.
This endeavor has to be used to develop a judicial system that is genuinely victim-centric, effective, and equitable, a system that puts the underprivileged first, clears backlogs, and uses technology to boost productivity. The discussion emphasizes the necessity for a fair strategy that preserves core rights and democratic ideals while enacting harsher penalties for offenders. India has to aspire to a justice system that serves all of its citizens and upholds the genuine spirit of the World Day for International Justice by means of transparent communication and inclusive reform.
