Latest news with #MSPS)Bill
Indian Express
3 days ago
- Politics
- Indian Express
‘MVA failure to oppose Urban Naxal Bill in Assembly sent wrong message, it must hit streets now': CPI(M)'s Dhawale
The smooth passage of the Maharashtra Special Public Security (MSPS) Bill in the state Assembly recently saw the members of the Opposition Maha Vikas Aghadi (MVA), which includes the Congress, NCP(SP) and Shiv Sena (UBT), failing to even express their dissent against the legislation dubbed as 'Urban Naxal Bill', which seeks 'effective prevention of certain unlawful activities of Left-wing extremist organisations'. The only dissenter from the Opposition ranks on the floor of the House was CPI(M) MLA Vinod Nikole. The Bill's critics have warned that it grants sweeping powers to the State that could criminalise dissent and ideological activity under the pretext of curbing Naxalism, raising fears of arbitrary arrests. In an interview with The Indian Express, CPI(M) Politburo member and All India Kisan Sabha (AIKS) chief Ashok Dhawale says the MSPS Bill marks a 'direct assault on democratic rights and civil liberties', calling the MVA MLAs' silence in the House 'unfortunate'. Excerpts: The CPI(M) has come out strongly against the MSPS Bill. Could you explain the reasons behind your opposition? We are completely opposed to this Bill. At its core, it is a direct attack on democratic rights and civil liberties. The government is using the so-called 'urban Naxal' threat as a red herring, an excuse to target dissent and silence critics of the ruling BJP and their corporate backers. Maharashtra Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis has publicly stated that the Naxal issue in Maharashtra is confined to just two tehsils in Gadchiroli. Union Home Minister Amit Shah also has publicly stated that the Naxalite Maoist problem has largely been eliminated nationwide. So, the question arises if the threat is under control, why this new law now? The government claims it is a security measure. Are you saying there is more to it? This law is not about security, it is about silencing voices. There are already enough draconian laws in place — UAPA at the national level, and MCOCA in Maharashtra. Some provisions in this new Bill are even more draconian than UAPA. So clearly, it's not about lack of legal tools. We believe this is being brought in to suppress growing people's movements in the state like the farmers fighting against land acquisition for the Shaktipeeth Highway, or resistance to corporate-led projects in Dharavi, Wadhwan port, and areas like Gadchiroli and Chandrapur. These projects, pushed by big corporates, especially mining projects in districts like Gadchiroli and Chandrapur for which land acquisition process has started, often violate forest and land rights. The Bill is a tool to criminalise these legitimate struggles. While you have criticised the Mahayuti government, several of your own allies in the MVA have been criticised for not opposing the Bill. What is your take? The record of the MVA who are our allies has been mixed. I would describe what happened in the Assembly as unfortunate. However, to be fair, several top MVA leaders joined earlier protests against this Bill. On June 3, there was a massive dharna at Azad Maidan, and leaders like Supriya Sule, Jayant Patil, and Uddhav Thackeray were present where they were categorical about their opposition to the Bill. On April 22, nearly 50,000 people protested against this Bill across Maharashtra. Though that was a Left-led call, many MVA leaders joined in solidarity. However, we were disappointed that when the Bill was introduced in the Assembly, only our MLA Vinod Nikole of the CPI(M) stood up to oppose it. Not a single MLA from the MVA bloc spoke out. On the same day we had an online meeting with NCP (SP) leader Jayant Patil and we raised this issue with him. We were told that several MVA MLAs who were part of the Select Committee had already opposed the Bill in that House Committee. But we believe that not opposing it on the Assembly floor sent the wrong message. It has not gone down well with the people of the state. To their credit, the very next day in the Legislative Council, the MVA rectified this mistake, where they unitedly opposed the Bill and walked out in protest. That act did some damage control, and we welcomed it. What are your expectations from the MVA now? And, are you planning to take any legal recourse against the Bill? Of course, we will examine legal options, but we are realistic. Generally, courts do not interfere in legislative processes. So we are not placing much emphasis on legal challenges. The real battle is on the streets. The farm laws passed by Parliament were ultimately repealed through mass struggle. Similarly, if we want to defeat this draconian Bill, we need a broad-based, united mass movement. We are trying to bring all forces together to make that happen. Speeches alone will not see the end of this Bill. We, including the major constituents of the MVA, will need to hit the streets. We are trying to persuade them. Let us see what happens. Would you like some provisions of the Bill to be diluted, or you want the bill to be repealed? The government had called for suggestions and objections to this Bill and it received 12,500 suggestions. Out of these, 9000 suggestions sought a complete scrapping of the Bill while another 3,000 called for amendments. We believe that the Bill in its entirety is harmful for the citizens of the state. We are not protesting so that the government tweak this law — we want it to be thrown out entirely.
The Hindu
4 days ago
- Politics
- The Hindu
Letters to The Editor — July 25, 2025
UK-India FTA It has been an exceptionally expedition and it has turned out to be fruitful. This new development heralds a new era of innovation, exploration, and opportunities for both nations which have had a complex history. Balagopal Gopinath, Keerikkad, Alappuzha, Kerala Maharashtra Bill I write this letter as the Deputy Director (News), Directorate General Of Information and Public Relation, Government of Maharashtra. The Editorial ('Danger of thought', July 24) is a gross misrepresentation of a necessary and carefully considered legislative measure. The Maharashtra Special Public Security (MSPS) Bill is aimed at providing the legal framework for handling unlawful activities of unlawful organisations that are a part of the united front of banned CPI(Maoist) and other left-wing extremist organisations. The Government of Maharashtra is steadfast in its commitment to upholding both the security of its citizens and the democratic freedom enshrined in the Constitution. The MSPS Bill does not exhibit police thought. The legislation targets organisations whose actions, whether through the written or spoken word, signs, or other activities, 'constitute a danger or menace to public order, peace and tranquillity'. This is a critical distinction. The Bill is not aimed at commentators, critics, or political opponents engaging in legitimate dissent. It is designed to tackle the insidious, overground network of Maoist front organisations that engage in the recruitment, fundraising, and radicalisation of youth and professionals, thereby fuelling violence and threatening to undermine the constitutional order. Varsha Andhale, Mumbai
Time of India
4 days ago
- Politics
- Time of India
Black cloth, scuffles and slogans: JNU students protest visit of Maharashtra CM
New Delhi: Black cloth fluttered and slogans of "Go back" echoed across the Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) campus on Thursday, as students protested the visit of Maharashtra chief minister Devendra Fadnavis , who visited the capital to inaugurate a new Marathi Language Centre and lay the foundation stone for another centre named after Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj on campus. T he protest, led by the Left-affiliated members JNU Students' Union (JNUSU), saw heavy police deployment and barricades outside the convention centre. A human chain was formed to prevent them from entering the venue, leading to a brief scuffle between students and the cops. Protesters waved black cloth at the CM and condemned the Maharashtra Special Public Safety (MSPS) Bill, calling it a tool to stifle dissent. "The protest is not against the centre which is being opened by JNU. This is against the visit of Maharashtra CM Fadnavis who silences the voice of dissent in his state — from comedians to Dalits, Muslim minorities and now the opposition, activists and protesters, through the MSPS Bill. JNU does not have any place for these hate mongers," said JNUSU president Nitish Kumar. You Can Also Check: Delhi AQI | Weather in Delhi | Bank Holidays in Delhi | Public Holidays in Delhi The protesters also condemned the JNU VC Santishree Dhulipudi Pandit for allowing Delhi Police to enter the campus. JNUSU general secretary Munteha Fatima said, "We will resist the presence of hate mongers who push anti-people bills like the MSPS Bill, curbing civil and democratic rights and attacking constitutional values. That such figures are being welcomed by the administration is a shame, especially in a university known for its critical thinking, resistance, and commitment to pluralism" "Why is only Marathi-speaking being promoted in Maharashtra, while migrants and North Indians continue to face discrimination? This is nothing but regional chauvinism," said JNUSU vice-president Manisha.
The Hindu
5 days ago
- Politics
- The Hindu
Danger of thought: on the Maharashtra Special Public Security Bill
The Maharashtra Special Public Security (MSPS) Bill, 2024 follows the disturbing pattern of executive overreach in the name of security. Existing laws are often misused against political opponents and critics of the ruling party, including commentators. Charges are often vague and sweeping, and the process itself becomes the punishment in many of these cases. Given this pattern, the move by Maharashtra's Mahayuti government led by the BJP to create an entire law to criminalise a certain kind of thought portends danger to freedom and democracy. Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis has said that the new law would only target those who try to undermine the constitutional order, but the possibility — indeed the probability — of its misuse is apparent. The State says that it is seeking to prevent Maoists from brainwashing youth, professionals, and civil servants through front organisations. As in the proposed law, which is now awaiting the assent of the Governor before coming into force, the State government can declare any suspect 'organisation' as an 'unlawful organisation'. Offences under the proposed law include membership of such organisations, fundraising on their behalf, managing or assisting them, and committing unlawful activities. The Bill's focus is on people and organisations that act as a front for Maoists, and what is unlawful is so broadly defined that anyone can be its target. Among other things, according to the Bill, 'unlawful' is 'any action taken by an individual or organization whether by committing an act or by words either spoken or written or by sign or by visible representation or otherwise, which constitute a danger or menace to public order, peace and tranquility'. Offences are cognisable and the accused can be arrested without a warrant. Punishment includes jail terms of two years to seven years, along with fines ranging from ₹2 lakh to ₹5 lakh. The State argues that Chhattisgarh, Telangana, Andhra Pradesh and Odisha have enacted Public Security Acts and banned 48 Naxal frontal organisations. The Opposition parties offered feeble resistance to the Bill and raised some broad concerns regarding its misuse but it was passed in the Assembly through a voice vote. As an afterthought, the Congress and the Shiv Sena (UBT) protested on the floor when it was taken up in the Legislative Council. The Bill had gone through a long deliberative process, but as it turns out, all parties appeared to be in agreement, barring the lone CPI (M) MLA who protested against it on the floor of the Assembly. The idea that thought and speech, howsoever unpalatable they might be to the ruling establishment, should be policed poses a grave danger for India as an open society.
Time of India
26-06-2025
- Politics
- Time of India
How a new law in Maharashtra could criminalise dissent
How a new law in Maharashtra could criminalise dissent Framed as a tool to fight 'urban Naxalism', Maharashtra's Special Public Security Bill has sparked outrage for its sweeping powers. Critics say it criminalises dissent, bypasses due process, and could turn peaceful protest into a punishable offence In December 2024, just a day before the winter session of the Maharashtra Assembly ended, the Eknath Shinde-led government tabled the Maharashtra Special Public Security (MSPS) Bill — a controversial law ostensibly crafted to target 'urban Naxals' and their support networks. But what the government describes as a necessary security measure, civil society groups have called 'draconian', 'unconstitutional', and 'a danger to India's democratic fabric'. As many as 12,000 objections and suggestions were submitted by April 1 in response to the Bill. Now, a broad coalition of political parties and grassroots organisations is preparing to march in protest at Mumbai's Azad Maidan on June 30.
