Communal Violence Bill under attack,UPA amends it to include all religious groups

The BJP and other parties had expressed apprehension that the Bill would divide the country on communal lines.

The other major objections were to the two super authorities the 2011 Bill proposed to implement the law. A seven-member ‘National Authority for Communal Harmony,Justice and Reparation’,and similar bodies in states. The UPA’s new Bill replaces the two with the NHRC and state human rights commissions,but assigns them mostly similar powers and functions “related to maintaining communal harmony”.

Effectively,bureaucrats have been made accountable to the NHRC. Similar powers vested in the ‘National Authority’ in the earlier Bill had been opposed by several states.

Both Bills made dereliction of duty by public servants,entrusted with powers under the provisions,an offence. One important change in the present Bill is that the responsibility of public servants in cases of breach of command and failure to exercise control over subordinates is applicable only when they are under his or her “direct command”.

The NHRC,at present,is mostly a recommendatory body,as in that when it sends its probe reports to governments,they are only obliged to “forward their comments,including the action taken or proposed to be taken”. There is no obligation to act. The commission has now been given wide powers,carried forwarded from the ‘National Authority’ provision of the 2011 Bill. So under the new Bill,the government is mandated to act on the NHRC’s advisories. Besides,the NHRC shall observe,monitor and review performance of bureaucrats,and is to act as an appelatory body if there is any discrepancy in maintaining records of relief and rehabilitation of victims.

Some of the NHRC’s proposed powers: The Centre and state governments and public servants “at all levels” are duty-bound to take action on all advisories and recommendations of the authority and submit an action taken report within 30 days. It is the duty of district magistrates and police commissioners to report to the NHRC “without delay” if they had “any knowledge or information of patterns and incidents of communal or targeted violence” or if they “anticipated any of these”. The union home ministry,home departments of all states and districts magistrates are mandated to send all reports they have received about communal violence or build-up and possibilities to the commission.

The NHRC is also mandated to observe,review and monitor the performance of public servants about the “effectiveness of steps taken for prevention of offences of communal violence,recording of information where offences under this Act have been committed,timely and effective investigation and prosecution of offences under the Act,provision of timely and adequate measures related to providing remedy and reparations”.

The NHRC can also frame schemes “in consultation with the Centre” for providing “reparation and remedy” to victims of communal violence.

While the Bill provides for a State Assessment Committee in every state to examine the status of reparation for victims after communal violence,only the NHRC is authorised to hear appeals against the committee if it is found lacking in keeping records of victims.

The assessment committees are to comprise the SHRC chairperson,the state chief secretary and a member of a human rights organisation approved by the NHRC. As the committee has been given vast rights,including survey of internally displaced persons,assessment of their loss etc,the appointment of a rights organisation member by the NHRC may be viewed as interference of the Centre.

The state authority in the earlier Bill could appoint NGO members or individuals as “Human Rights Defender” “to implement the Act in each district”. The NHRC can now appoint “independent observers to observe court proceedings” for offences punishable under the Bill.

The UPA has scrapped some other controversial provisions from the earlier Bill too. Earlier,the Centre was mandated to provide investigative staff to the ‘National Authority’ “under an officer not below a director general of police”. Effectively,covering the entire police department. Earlier,the state governments were also mandated to set up a probe under an HC judge into the conduct of public servants during communal violence. Besides,a judge was allowed to conclude a sexual assault offence on the “sole testimony” of a victim. These provisions are not in the present draft.

Another important provision in the present Bill,which was not in the earlier legislation,deals with the declaration and notification of certain areas as “communally disturbed” and deployment of the Army for “controlling communal violence”. If in the opinion of the district magistrate or police commissioner or any other competent authority,“one or more offences are being committed in any area… or hostile environment is being created… against persons having a particular religious or linguistic identity… which threatens the secular fabric”,the area may be declared communally disturbed. Here,if the state government wants,it can ask the Centre to deploy armed forces. And the Centre is mandated to deploy the Army.

However,if the offence is committed by a member of the armed forces or security forces,the NHRC may only seek a report from the Centre,and after the receipt,may either not proceed with the complaint or make its recommendations to the government.

The new Bill,as its previous form,also talks of establishment of relief camps for those displaced by communal violence and their restitution and rehabilitation.

In some aspects though,the Bill has little new. “Hate Propaganda” is the first offence under Section 6 of the new Bill and the offender is “whoever publishes,communicates or disseminates by words,or signs…inciting hatred causing clear danger of violence against persons having a particular religious or linguistic identity”. Section 153 A of the IPC has an almost similar definition for this offence.

The punishment for both Hate Propaganda and Section 153 A of IPC is also identical — up to three years imprisonment and a fine.