79 civil society organisations have jointly written to Mr Chandrashekhar Bawankule, the Chairperson of the Joint Select Committee on Maharashtra Special Public Security Bill 2024 (“the Bill”) to register their strong objections and misgivings over the proposed law.
The organisations have stated that they are deeply concerned about the implications of the Bill for civil liberties in the state, in particular the rights of the citizens to freedom of speech and expression, association and assembly, the right to protest peacefully and the right to privacy.
(Please scroll below for the letter, issued in English and Marathi, for the full list of signatories).
The bill, which was re-introduced in the Maharashtra Assembly on December 18, 2024, was referred to a 21-member Joint Select Committee which is mandated to present its report on the Bill, after taking into account views of stakeholders, in the forthcoming budget session of the Maharashtra Legislative Assembly, reportedly scheduled to commence from March 3, 2025.
However, in the absence of any information about who or which “stakeholders” whose views will be solicited, the entire process is shrouded in opacity. Moreover, the bill introduced in December 2024 has not been made available in the public domain nor made open to public scrutiny in the form of any public consultation or hearing. An important Bill of this nature must be discussed in public as it affects the civil liberties of all citizens of Maharashtra.
The signatories noted that the Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis, while introducing the bill, had stated that the bill would tackle Naxalism in rural areas and frontal organisations in urban areas “which work towards creating distrust about the country and its institutions.” However, the signatories record their deep misgivings about this statement and said that “legitimate criticism of state policies or demand for accountability from institutions, which is the work active citizenry and human rights activists do in exercise of their rights, freedoms and duties under the Indian Constitution, could be labelled as creating “distrust” and weaponized against dissenters and justice seekers.”
The letter submitted to the Joint Select Committee detailed the problematic provisions of the bill, including Clauses 2 (f), 2 (d), Clause 3, Clauses 5, 8, 9, 10 and 16, dealing with provisions termed as unlawful but without giving any definitions, penalties, processes like an Advisory Board to review the decisions of the government but allows the government to not disclose any “fact” if it considers it against the public interest!
The signatories also pointed out that such laws have not proved effective in curbing unlawful activities and that these draconian laws, including the Chhattisgarh Vishesh Jan Suraksha Adhiniyam (2005) (“Chhatisgarh Act”) and The Andhra Pradesh Special Public Security Act (1992) have been instead misused to target journalists, lawyers, environmental defenders, citizen activists and adivasi protestors. A constitutional challenge to the Chhattisgarh Act is pending before the Hon’ble Supreme Court.
The signatories, who drew attention of the Committee to Maharashtra’s long and illustrious history of social reform and political movements for democracy, feared that the Maharashtra Special Public Security Bill 2024 will seek to destroy this historical legacy and demanded that this Bill is rejected outright and to affirm Maharashtra’s commitment to its democratic ethos and progressive character.
