Search the Internet          Tips

Vaiko challenges Section 21 of POTA

In a writ petition, he sought a direction from the apex court to declare the concerned section as 'unconstitutional'.

Vaiko, who put up a spirited defence of POTA in the Lok Sabha, was arrested under the Act on July 11 at Chennai airport, minutes after his return from an overseas tour, for his alleged remarks in support of the outlawed LTTE at a public meeting at Thirumangalam on June 29.

He contended that Section 21(1) and (3) of POTA had 'offended' Article 10(1)(a) and 19 (1)(c) of the Constitution and therefore, was 'unconstitutional'.

"Does the mere expression of sympathy for Tamils in Sri Lanka, for whom the LTTE has become the sole representative as recognised by the international community, amount to support to a terrorist organisation and thereby empower the state to curtail personal liberty?" he asked.

Vaiko said that during the public meeting, he had only dwelt on what he had spoken in the Lok Sabha on April 30. He contended that he had never advocated establishment of an office for the LTTE in India, but had expressed support to it in its 'crusade' for the cause of suffering Tamils in Sri Lanka'.

Vaiko, in his petition, said Section 21 of POTA prohibited a citizen from exercising his right to make a choice, forbade free and general discussions on matters of public interest like foreign policy adopted or to be adopted in relation to a foreign organisation and therefore, was unconstitutional.

The section 'affected' not only his fundamental right to carry out his political activities, but also his freedom of speech and expression, including propagation of ideas, which he thought were in the best interests of the nation and humanity, he said.

As per the section, inviting support for a terrorist organisation was made an offence without definition. "Inviting support may not involve encouragement to commit violent and criminal acts," he said adding that the wording of the section had led to 'violation' of the right to freedom of expression.

The 'vague manner' in which the section was defined, coupled with enhanced punishment based on harsher procedures, enabled political parties in power, along with local executive authorities, to deal with the opposition as terrorists, as it happened in his case, he pointed out.

Just because turmoil in the neighbouring island had resulted in the influx of refugees to India, any reference to it could not be construed as supporting terrorism, he contended.

The Union law and home secretaries and corresponding officials in Tamil Nadu have been made respondents in the writ petition.

Vaiko, in his address at the meeting, is alleged to have said, "I was a supporter of the LTTE yesterday, I am a supporter today, and I will be a supporter tomorrow."

Tell us what you think of this report