 Hello and welcome to NewsClick. Professor J. N. Sai Baba has been convicted by a trial court and has been sentenced life imprisonment for his alleged links with Mahvis. To discuss the issue we have with us, Gautam Lavalaka, an eminent human rights activist. Welcome to NewsClick, Gautam. So, Professor J. N. Sai Baba along with five other people have been convicted by a trial court and I think four of them have been sentenced life imprisonment. So, what do you think, what implication would it have? Let us begin with the conviction of six people, five of them got life imprisonment and one ten years imprisonment, Vijay from Kanker. Out of them two are villagers, Adivasis from Ghatchiroli. Apart from that there is a student from JNU Hemmishra Prashant Rahi, a journalist from Mutrakhan and J. N. Sai Baba from Delhi University. It is interesting if I can just quote an excerpt from the judgment which shows what is the offence that is being made out against all of them. That they are active members of, active members of CPI Maoist and its frontal organizations. They hatched criminal conspiracy to create violence to cause public disorder and to spread disaffection towards the center and state governments and were found in possession of printed naxal literature circulating information etc. etc. So, it is this is their offense. Now, the point is that the reason why they are being prosecuted is for their ideology either the sympathy, the support or membership of an organization, but at the level of ideological alignment. It is this which has been made a criminal offense and it is this which is being read as connected to political violence etc. etc. etc. etc. Under normal law, unless you are found to have committed an actual crime, you can be punished. Here what under unlawful activities prevention act it is possible to convict you on ground of your thought. It is a kind of a thought policing and criminalization of a certain ideology. It is this which compels the judge Shinde to also remark. Let me quote again from the judgment Para-1013 which is says quote, in my opinion the imprisonment for life is also not a sufficient punishment to the accused, but the hands of the court are closed so on and so forth unquote. My point is that left to himself, he would have preferred death penalty for this crime. The warning for us is that the direction in which we are moving is frightening that a person for or persons for their ideology, not for an actual crime that they have committed can be given life imprisonment which under Supreme Court's own judgment and understanding life imprisonment means till the end of the one's life then Mahesh Tirke who is 22 years old, Pandu Pore Naroth who is 27 years old, Hem Mishra who is 32 years old, Vijay Tirke is 30 years old, Sai Baba is 47 and Prasanth Rahi 54 years old. Imagine that they are supposed as far as the trial judge is concerned that the crime is such and their offences of such, such heinous and grievous nature although no criminal act has been committed that they deserve life imprisonment which means life until the end of one's life. It's frightening. It's a frightening thing so not just the conviction on ground of ideology and thought but also the quantum of punishment itself both together should be read as a clear indication of what unlawful activities prevention act means. Let me explain just briefly the difference between the two. Once you invoke unlawful activities prevention act then even a normal crime becomes an aggravated crime and the quantum of punishment gets enhanced. So for the same crime under a normal law the punishment that you get it gets enhanced if unlawful activities prevention act or any provision from that act are read into it. This is creating a system where the rights of the accused and especially in political trials of this nature because clearly it's a political trial. It's a trial against an ideology. Their persecution and their prosecution is a result of this. Gautam I would like to also throw some light on the case circumstances under which Sai Baba was first time arrested, police came in plain clothes, they picked him up from a college. Also the things that they seized from his place none of them were sealed which is what their family members are claiming. So did the court doesn't pay attention to all these things? Obviously the court has paid attention to it and has refused to accept any of those arguments and contentions. Now that is as far as I mean as for that legal battle is going to continue because it's going to go into appeal. Even in ordinarily I mean any life imprisonment or death penalty automatically goes in appeal to the high court and the Supreme Court. And given the Supreme Court's standing verdict which has not been overturned that there is no such thing as guilty by association that the sheer membership of an organization doesn't amount to a criminal act that you must have actually enacted being part of a criminal you know preparing for or have committed a criminal offense that you can be prosecuted. Obviously this judge doesn't give much you know credence to what the superior courts have said. So that legal battle will continue. But let me remind that this is not the first time where UAPA has been informed any number of Hindustanis have been arrested for or either they are Muslims or their Dalits they are Adivasis or left oriented individuals including civil liberties activists social activists journalists etc etc these are the people who have come under have been where unlawful activities prevention act has been involved. The way in which the police investigate the enormous powers that they enjoy which they come to then exercise arrogantly arbitrarily everywhere they go beyond their brief there is a suspicion and in fact there is evidence to suggest that fake charges are filed against any number of people I mean look if you look at the list of acquittals in the last few years of so many of these people who were accused of being semi-crime who are supposed to be members of semi which stands banned under unlawful activities prevention act or Arun Farera Varnan Gonzales, Binay Xen, Narayan Sanyal, Piyush Guha any number of people who have been charged under unlawful activities prevention act in so many of their cases they've been acquitted which makes it also clear that very often these these these charge sheets are found wanting even in terms of of the evidence that is required in this particular case completely going by what he claims is something illegal which is Naxal literature literature cannot be banned ideas cannot be banned. Yeah actually that was my next question that can you please throw some light on the Supreme Court judgment that you were recently referring to. Well they call it Naxal literature because anything connected with an organization which stands banned in the eyes of the authorities material the literature of that organization itself becomes a something criminal. So in their reading but the point is unless you've committed an offense you can't be I mean for instance the Supreme Court has on umpteen times has explained the difference between advocacy and incitement you can advocate violence but you can't incite violence. So my advocacy of say for instance armed resistance cannot be is not a crime but if I incite violence that becomes criminal. Now obviously there is a lot of learning that this judge has to go through to realize I mean this is an ideological political judgment very clearly and his orientation is extreme either chauvinistic I mean jingoistic and uncritical. Given that it very clearly exhibits the the the the the the predilection of the judge but that's not the main issue the point is that these powers are derived from unlawful activities prevention act this enormous arbitrary power to dish out such sentences and punishment A to accept the validity of that evidence then B to of the to give a quantum of punishment disproportionate to the crime in any way even if it's counted as an offense it makes it very clear that the the powers flow from unlawful activities prevention and act and that's where we must target at attention how does unlawful activities prevention act define unlawful and terror that itself is something that must be put to question. The organization I work for People's Union for Democratic Rights we have come out with two reports one which looks at the historic history of unlawful activities prevention act how it came into being starting with the first amendment to the constitution in 1951 which imposed reasonable instructions on freedom of speech association and peaceful assembly to the time the unlawful activities prevention act was passed in 67 and then new entire port of provisions were incorporated in 2004 and subsequently in 2008 it's that history which must be stood and I would I would really urge your your the people who watch your news click to go to podr.org and take a look at our reports band and dam which looks at which is a study of how ua pa operates when they ban an organization and it's a study of semi struggle for for for justice in the tribunals and the earlier report from 2012 which looks at the history of unlawful activities prevention act because I think unless we accept and recognize that a big battle must be against unlawful activities prevention act we'll get nowhere because I'm 100% sure that once it goes to the superior court they stand a good chance of being vindicated and being acquitted of those for what they have been punished unless I mean unjustly and unfairly but they're going to remain incarcerated for that long it can take some time before they come out but a real battle must be against for release of all those who be judged under unlawful activities prevention act and for repeal of unlawful activities prevention act it's an abominable obnoxious undemocratic black law that deserves not to be a part of it and if I may add one thing it's actually it's interesting that what unlawful activities prevention act does is what the freedom movement always fought against had rejected and it's that legal system which the british rajd used against the freedom movement has been revived was first revived in form of tada then pota and now unlawful activities prevention act so what kind of a country is it we talk about nationalism indianess and we are willing to throw stones and kill each other for over that but we don't even have the sense of of history and perspective to understand how an obnoxious law from british raj colonial period is being used by post independent governments in this country to throttle our rights our civil liberties thanks a lot gotham for giving us your time and as these things proceed it will be coming back to you on such issues thanks a lot thank you for watching news click