While welcoming the repealing of the Prevention of Terrorism Act of 2002, the Committee on International Human Rights of the New York City Bar Association said such draconian laws would do nothing to prevent terrorism.
'India has faced serious threats from terrorism and other politicised violence for decades, but these special anti-terrorism laws have not proven particularly effective in combating terrorism,' a report released by the association said.
The report, prepared after a two-year study, also asks India to transform its British colonial-era police and criminal justice institutions.
The 135-page report analyses human rights concerns from anti-terrorism laws and the colonial-era practices and institutions.
"Respect for human rights when combating terrorism is a strategic imperative," said Anil Kalhan, chair of the committee's India project. "As the Supreme Court of India has recognised, terrorism often is designed 'to provoke an overreaction' and therefore 'thrives where human rights are violated."
"Draconian laws often provide terrorists exactly the response they hope for and, in the process, plant the seeds for future violence. That is an important lesson for all countries facing the threat of terrorism," he said.
Despite laws like POTA, terrorism has persisted, and few actual terrorists have successfully been prosecuted, the report noted. At the same time such laws have raised numerous human rights concerns in India and other countries, the report said.
It draws extensively from information learned during a two-week visit to India in 2005 by several association members and also from research and interaction with organisations in India.
The association has previously conducted several similar projects examining the same range of issues in other countries, including Northern Ireland, Hong Kong, and Indonesia.
"The report does not tarnish the image of India," said Kalhan, a visiting assistant professor at Fordham Law School and a cooperating attorney with the NYU School of Law Immigrant Rights Clinic.
Mamta Kaushal, a former associate at the law firm of Wachtel and Masyr, LLP, co-ordinated the project.
Kalhan said the report was sent to officials and several organisations in India.
"Both government officials and private organizations have welcomed the opportunity to engage in dialogue with members of the New York City Bar. An important goal of this project is to promote dialogue and permit Indians and Americans to learn from each other about our respective experiences.
"In addition to recommending ways in which India can protect fundamental rights and ensure long-term security more effectively, the project identifies lessons relevant to all democracies facing this challenge," he said.
The Supreme Court of India and former foreign minister Jaswant Singh have in the past cautioned against such draconian responses to terrorism, noting that sometimes, harsh responses can cause the government not just to lose its 'moral authority' when fighting terrorism.
Colin Powell, former secretary of state, recently echoed Jaswant Singh's exact words about Punjab in the 1980s in expressing concern that the United States may be losing
its 'moral authority' in the fight against terrorism, he noted.
"The report is not an interference in the internal affairs of the country, but rather an effort to engage in dialogue and promote mutual respect for the rule of law and fundamental rights," Kalhan said.
He noted the work of groups like Human Rights Watch and said that 'we have built upon the extensive work these groups already have done.'
"Another pressing problem cited in the report is about the reforms needed in the police and criminal justice administration. All parties in India support reform in this area," Kalhan pointed out.
