2001

Critics Denounce Indian Anti-terror Measure

20 September 2001 | Voice of America

In India, human rights groups and opposition political parties strongly oppose a tough new anti-terrorism law the government wants to pass in the current session of Parliament.

The Prevention of Terrorism Ordinance was passed last month under emergency constitutional provisions, but must be ratified by Parliament to remain in force. It was framed by the Bharatiya-Janata Party-led government after the September 11 attacks in the United States.

2001

The truth about POTO

Dec 2001 | frontlineonnet.com
Volume 18 – Issue 25, Dec. 08-21,2001
India’s National Magazine, from the publishers of THE HINDU

ANALYSIS
The draconian Prevention of Terrorism Ordinance draws heavily from anti-terrorism Acts in the United States and the United Kingdom. But unlike those in the latter two, which cover only foreigners in the respective nations, POTO affects all Indians.

2001

JUDGEMENT RESERVED: The Case of the National Human Rights Commission of India

September 2001 | india-seminar.com

DURING the ’90s, following both national and international criticism of India’s lack of institutional mechanisms for the protection of human rights in the country, the central government enacted the Protection of Human Rights Act 1993 (PHRA). One central pillar of this act was the creation of the National Human Rights Commission of India (NHRC). However, the NHRC that it created lacked a specific structure or mandate.

2001

Audit of Human Rights

3-9 November 2001
Economic and Political Weekly; Vol. XXXVI No. 44
by A. G. Noorani
Has the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) made a significant impact on the state of human rights in India? Is it at all relevant to the Kashmiri who has to bear the brunt of systematic custodial deaths, encounters, disappearances and other forms of brutal repression. The South Asia Human Rights Documentation Centre has published a much-needed audit of the NHRC’s work.

Scroll to Top