GCTOC

Finally The Gujarat Control of Terrorism and Organised Crime (GCTOC) Bill is passed by legislation assembly of Gujarat. First it was introduced in 2004 as Gujarat Control of Organised Crime Bill (GUJCOC), 2003, which was earlier rejected twice by the President due to some of its contentious provisions. In 2004, it is rejected by our presidents A.P.J. Abdul Kalam and in 2008 by Pratibha Patil.  Now it is again sent to the president with the hope to be passed as NDA is in government.

Contentious Provisions in bill

·  The harsh provision in the bill is that custody of accused can be of 180 days instead of 90 days stated in Code of Criminal Procedure. In this period accused may or may not be in judicial custody. i.e. it can be in police custody for 180 days.

·   Nonbailabe term is there in clause 20(4) of the bill. It doesn’t mean no bail at all. It means bail can be acquired by appropriate magistrate. It is stated in article that “Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, no person accused of an offence punishable under this Act shall, if in custody, be released on bail or on his own bond.” i.e. person can’t be released on self bail.

· The Bill include Clause 16 that stipulates that “a confession made by a person before a police officer not below the rank of Superintendent of Police…shall be admissible in the trial of such accused, co-accused, abettor or conspirator.”

· The Bill makes “evidence collected through the interception of wire, electronic or oral communication” admissible in the court. It is basically authorisation of interception in telephonic conversions and their admissibility as evidence.
· Clause 25 of the Bill states, “No suit, prosecution or other legal proceeding shall lie against the State government or any officer or authority of the State government for anything which is in good faith done or intended to be done in pursuance of this Act.” It provides immunity to the State government from legal action. 

Safeguards

•  Under MCOCA and GCTOC, there are several safeguards for the citizen, prime among them being the stipulation that the permission of a Deputy Inspector General of Police (DIG)/Additional Commissioner of Police (ACP) is required for registering a case.
•  The investigating officer will have to be of the rank of Deputy Superintendent (DSP).
• The permission of an Additional Director General of Police (ADGP) is required for charge sheeting an accused before a court.
• Critics believe that Phone taping will be done by police to fulfil personal greed and intimidation. What the critics forget is that the normal procedure, of the police obtaining the Home Secretary’s permission, has still to be observed under GCTOC.
• Narendra modi said the bill Xerox copy of the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act (MCOCA), 1999.
• A heartening feature of MCOCA is that, among those charged under it till now, only a small number is from the minority communities. The Dharmadhikari Committee, which was appointed by the Maharashtra government to go into the working of MCOCA, found no major shortcomings or criticism that would detract from the merits of the Act. Facts such as there being an average of about 40 cases registered annually and about 6-7 persons arrested in each case, especially in a large State like Maharashtra, are testimony to the fact that the use of MCOCA has been extremely selective and not indiscriminate as was the case with TADA or POTA.
• Being situated on the border with Pakistan, Gujarat has every reason to protect itself as well as it can, and the new piece of legislation fits into the scheme of things in the State.

Difference between MCOCA and GCTOC

Basically MCOCA and GCTOC both are almost same having almost same provisions. As MCOCA Also accept the interception in electronic media as evidence and all other provisions. But the only difference is about bail. The MCOCA allows for the court to grant bail as long as the accused wasn't on bail in any other case, while the GUJTOC seems to draw its inspiration from the now repealed Prevention of Terrorism Act (POTA) which didn't allow for an accused to be granted bail if a public prosecutor were to oppose it.

Final Conclusion

Though GCTOC is called as draconian act, it can be used as harsh weapon against terrorists and criminals for whom talks about human rights is senseless. In past also, laws like TADA and POTA came into enforcement but they were allowed to lapse due to gross abuse of these laws. But MCOCA is successfully implemented and successful result is also obtained by it. That’s why delhi also enact the same law in it’s province. Even US also took strict actions against terrorism after 9/11 without taking account allegations of worldwide human right organisations. And that’s why US doesn’t have terrorists attacks like india has. One surely should think about innocent people being tortured in the name of acts like GCTOC but on the other hand strict action is also necessary against brutal terrorism. And nowdays as we can see the people from india also joining the terrorist organisations like ISIS and mostly communication is done by electronic medium it Is inevitable to enact the law like this. But finally it can be useful only if it is implemented honestly by bureaucrats and government.

Source : The Hindu Newspaper