Mumbai, Jul 18 (PTI) A delegation of opposition leaders on Friday submitted a letter to Governor CP Radhakrishnan against the Maharashtra Special Public Security Bill 2024 which they claimed was “oppressive, ambiguous and open to misuse”.
The opposition leaders accused the state government of attempting to legitimise extraordinary executive powers under the guise of public security.
“Although some procedural changes have been made following the recommendations of the Joint Committee, the basic structure of the Bill is oppressive, ambiguous and open to misuse,” the letter said, adding that key concerns raised by the Opposition, civil society and constitutional experts had either been ignored or sidelined.
The delegation expressed alarm over the Bill’s sweeping powers, which they argue could criminalise dissent and target opposition movements.
According to the letter, the revised Bill that was tabled in the Legislative Assembly on July 10 empowers the executive to declare organisations “unlawful” without following due process, criminalises regular opposition activities under vague definitions of “illegal activity”, and allows for confiscation, eviction, and financial penalties through extrajudicial means.
The opposition further raised concerns over the exclusion of lower courts from jurisdiction under the Bill, thereby limiting avenues for legal remedy.
The legislation also grants blanket immunity to officials acting “in good faith,” a provision the legislators warned could encourage abuse of power.
The amended purpose clause, which now targets ‘left-wing extremist organisations or similar organisations’, introduces ideological bias and leaves space for the state to label farmers’ groups, students’ unions or civil rights bodies as threats to public order, the letter stated.
“Extremism is not limited to any one ideology,” the strongly worded letter asserted.
These leaders criticised Section 2(f) of the Bill for defining “unlawful acts” in overly broad terms that include speech, signs, gestures, and fundraising, even when such acts only “tend to interfere” with public order or “cause concern”.
The opposition contended that such definitions violate principles of proportionality enshrined in Articles 19 and 21 of the Constitution.
Sections 3 to 7 of the Bill, which outline procedures for declaring organisations unlawful, were also flagged for bypassing safeguards.
The opposition said the composition and appointment process of the Advisory Board, which will be made up of retired judges and a public prosecutor, lacks transparency and could be vulnerable to political interference.
Opposition leaders asserted such provisions amount to criminalising association, belief and participation.
“The government’s approach suppresses dissent, not safeguards public security,” the letter concluded. PTI ND BNM
This report is auto-generated from PTI news service. ThePrint holds no responsibility for its content.