| 词条 | Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act |
| 释义 |
| short_title = Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act | image = | imagesize = 150 | imagelink = | imagealt = | caption = | long_title = An Act to make special provisions for the prevention of, and for coping with, terrorist and disruptive activities and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto. | citation = | territorial_extent = Whole of India including State of Jammu and Kashmir | enacted_by = Parliament of India | date_enacted = | date_assented = 3 September 1987 | date_signed = | date_commenced = 24 May 1987 | bill = | bill_citation = | bill_date = | introduced_by = | 1st_reading = | 2nd_reading = | 3rd_reading = | white_paper = | committee_report = | amendments = Act 16 of 1989, Act 43 of 1993 | repeals = | status = Repealed | related_legislation = | summary = | keywords = }}Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, commonly known as TADA, was an Indian anti-terrorism law which was in force between 1985 and 1995 (modified in 1987) under the background of the Punjab insurgency and was applied to whole of India. It came into effect on 23 May 1985.[1] It was renewed in 1989, 1991 and 1993 before being allowed to lapse in 1995 due to increasing unpopularity after widespread allegations of abuse.[2] It was the first anti-terrorism law legislated by the government to define and counter terrorist activities.[3] The Act's third paragraph gives a very thorough definition of "terrorism": {{quote|"Whoever with intent to overawe the Government as by law established or to strike terror in the people or any section of the people or to alienate any section of the people or to adversely affect the harmony amongst different sections of the people does any act or thing by using bombs, dynamite or other explosive substances or inflammable substances or lethal weapons or poisons or noxious gases or other chemicals or by any other substances (whether biological or otherwise) of a hazardous nature in such a manner as to cause, or as is likely to cause, death of, or injuries to, any person or persons or loss of, or damage to, or destruction of, property or disruption of any supplies or services essential to the life of the community, or detains any person and threatens to kill or injure such person in order to compel the Government or any other person to do or abstain from doing any act, commits a terrorist act."}}PowersThe law gave wide powers to law enforcement agencies for dealing with national terrorist and 'socially disruptive' activities.[1] The police were not obliged to produce a detainee before a judicial magistrate within 24 hours.[1] The accused person could be detained up to 1 year.[1] Confessions made to police officers was admissible as evidence in the court of law, with the burden of proof being on the accused to prove his innocence.[1] Courts were set up exclusively to hear the cases and deliver judgements pertaining to the persons accused under this Act.[1] The trials could be held in camera with the identities of the witnesses kept hidden.[1] Under 7A of the Act, Police officers were also empowered to attach the properties of the accused under this Act. Under this act police have no rights to give third degree or harassed anyone to speak as mentioned in the act. Controversial provisionsThe Act was widely criticised by human rights organisations as it contained provisions violating human rights.[2][4][5] The criticism are centred on the following facts:-
ImpactThe number of people arrested under the act had exceeded 76,000, by 30 June 1994.[1] Twenty-five percent of these cases were dropped by the police without any charges being framed.[1] Only 35 percent of the cases were brought to trial, of which 95 percent resulted in acquittals.[1] Less than 2 percent of those arrested were convicted.[1] The TADA act was ultimately repealed and succeeded by the Prevention of Terrorist Activities Act (2002-2004) and this act was subsequently repealed after much controversy as well.[6] Yet many continue to be held under TADA. Supreme Court rulingThe Supreme Court has held that mere membership of a banned organisation does not make the member liable for the punishment under this Act.[7] See also
Citations1. ^1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 {{harvnb|Zaidi|2002|p=288}} 2. ^1 {{cite journal| first=Anil| last=Kalhan |ssrn=970503|title=Colonial Continuities: Human Rights, Antiterrorism, and Security Laws in India|year=2006|publisher=20 Colum. J. Asian L. 93|accessdate=|display-authors=etal}} 3. ^{{cite web|url=http://www.satp.org/satporgtp/countries/india/document/actandordinances/TADA.HTM#7A|title=(THE) Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (PREVENTION) ACT, 1987|publisher=satp.org|accessdate=13 April 2015}} 4. ^{{cite book|title=Human Rights in India: Kashmir Under Siege|author1=Asia Watch Committee (U.S.)|author2=Human Rights Watch (Organization)|date=1991|publisher=Human Rights Watch|isbn=9780300056143|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=jrGwSsSchRUC|page=111|accessdate=13 April 2015}} 5. ^{{cite web|url=http://www.telegraphindia.com/1111213/jsp/northeast/story_14872900.jsp|title=Court acquits 29 booked under Tada|publisher=telegraphindia.com|accessdate=13 April 2015}} 6. ^{{cite web|url=http://www.indiacode.nic.in/rspaging.asp?tfnm=200426|title=aaa|publisher=indiacode.nic.in|accessdate=13 April 2015}} 7. ^Arup Bhuyan Vs. State of Assam- Criminal Appeal No. 889 of 2007 References{{Refbegin|2}}
|year=2002 |last=Zaidi |first=S. Hussain |title=Black Friday – The True Story of the Bombay Bomb Blasts |publisher= Penguin Books |location=Mumbai, India |isbn=978-0-14-302821-5 |ref=harv |postscript=}}.{{Refend}} External links
10 : Terrorism laws in India|Acts of the Parliament of India 1985|1993 Bombay bombings|1990s in India|1987 in India|1989 in India|1991 in India|1995 in India|Repealed Indian legislation|Rajiv Gandhi administration |
| 随便看 |
|
开放百科全书收录14589846条英语、德语、日语等多语种百科知识，基本涵盖了大多数领域的百科知识，是一部内容自由、开放的电子版国际百科全书。