The Gujarat Control of Terrorism and Organised Crime (GCTOC) Bill, an anti-terror legislation passed by Gujarat in 2015, recently received approval from the President of India. This announcement has stirred up discussion across the nation as well as internationally.
Key Provisions of the GCTOC Bill
This new legislation provides a specific definition for a ‘terrorist act’. It is regarded as any act committed with the intention to disrupt law and order, or pose a threat to the unity, integrity, and security of the state. The Bill also characterizes organized crime as criminal activities that are conducted for substantial profit.
Apart from recognizing economic offences such as Ponzi schemes, multi-level marketing schemes, and organized betting, the bill targets extortion, land grabbing, contract killings, cybercrimes, and human trafficking. The provision enables investigating agencies to intercept telephonic conversations and submit them as legitimate evidence in court, but only after receiving approval from the additional chief secretary level.
Significantly, the confessions made before a police officer will be considered as evidence, though only those made to an officer of the rank of Superintendent of Police (SP) or above would be admissible in court. This legislation provides authorities with an extended period of 180 days to file a charge sheet, in contrast to the usual 90 days. The GCTOC Bill also proposes stricter conditions for bail and makes provision for a special court and the appointment of special public prosecutors.
Controversial Provisions and Criticism
Several aspects of this new law have sparked controversy. Critics argue that the allowance for intercepted telephonic conversations as legitimate evidence infringes upon the Right to Privacy (Article 21). Similarly, the consideration of confession made before police officers as evidence is seen as violating the fundamental rights of an accused (Article 20). Article 20(3) of the constitution specifies that no person accused of any offence shall be compelled to be a witness against himself.
The extension of time for filing a charge sheet, up to 180 days from the standard 90 days, also poses issues. This clause has the potential to keep a person under detention for an extended period, which some argue is inhumane. These provisions are similar to those of the Centre’s Prevention of Terrorist Activities Act (POTA) which was repealed in 2004 due to arbitrary use.
| Provision | Controversy |
|---|---|
| Interception of telephonic conversations | Violates Right to Privacy (Article 21) |
| Confessions made before police officers | Violates fundamental rights of accused (Article 20) |
| Extended time for charge sheet filing | Leads to extended detention periods |
Benefits of the GCTOC Bill
The GCTOC Bill may not be without its critics, but it also presents several potential benefits. The coastal state of Gujarat shares a border with Pakistan, therefore such legislation is necessary to ensure improved safety and security. By extending certain powers to law enforcement officials, it aims to enhance the security of the state and control cybercrime and narco-terrorism fuelled by terrorist outfits from across the border.
