An application has been filed before the Supreme Court seeking a direction to the Centre to frame a comprehensive legislation against custodial torture..The application filed by former Union Law Minister Dr. Ashwani Kumar has been posted for January 2019 by the Bench of Chief Justice of India Ranjan Gogoi and Justice Ajay Rastogi..It is stated that despite the assurance given by the Attorney General, the recommendations by the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC), and the 273rd Law Commission report, the government has not initiated the framing of any legislation on the subject of custodial torture till date..A petition in this regard filed by Kumar was heard by the Apex Court and disposed of in November 2017, after AG KK Venugopal had told the Court that the prevention of custodial torture was a subject of serious consideration by the government..In his application, Kumar has stated that since the Court’s order of November 2017, there have been media reports of custodial torture almost on a daily basis. Calling upon the government to take action, it states,.“Failure of the Union Government to bridge the gap in the law by providing a comprehensive umbrella legislation to prevent custodial torture is a clear negation of its constitutional obligation.”.Citing the Court’s orders directing the Centre to legislate on subjects like mob violence and sexual harassment at the workplace, the applicant has prayed for a similar direction to be given in the instant case for preventing custodial torture and upholding the fundamental rights as guaranteed under the Constitution of India..Stating that the Right to Life under Article 21 of the Constitution guarantees not just animal existence but also includes right against torture, the application says,.“Article 21 of the Constitution also includes within its ambit a guarantee against torture and assault by the State or its functionaries. Custodial violence and torture violate this inviolable right with impunity.”.Terming the Apex Court as the ultimate protector of constitutional values and fundamental rights, the applicant has prayed for the Court to thus direct the Centre to frame a stand-alone and comprehensive legislation..The matter will be heard next in January 2019..In his petition that was disposed of, Kumar had contended that the Prevention of Torture Bill, 2010 – passed in the Lok Sabha to bring Indian laws at par with the United Nations Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, 1987 – should be reintroduced in the Parliament at the earliest to enable India to fulfil its international obligations under the various international conventions. However, the Indian government is yet to ratify the UN Convention..Senior Advocate Colin Gonsalves, who was appointed Amicus Curiae in Kumar’s petition said in a later interview,.“See, Ashwani Kumar’s petition was a good petition, he argued very well in the Supreme Court and all that, but he’s still under the wrong understanding that in order to ratify a Convention you must make a law. The United Nations has a hundred times clarified that it is not a precondition to ratification. In fact, once you ratify it, then the making of your law becomes easier, because there is a global process and you get inputs from other countries.”
An application has been filed before the Supreme Court seeking a direction to the Centre to frame a comprehensive legislation against custodial torture..The application filed by former Union Law Minister Dr. Ashwani Kumar has been posted for January 2019 by the Bench of Chief Justice of India Ranjan Gogoi and Justice Ajay Rastogi..It is stated that despite the assurance given by the Attorney General, the recommendations by the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC), and the 273rd Law Commission report, the government has not initiated the framing of any legislation on the subject of custodial torture till date..A petition in this regard filed by Kumar was heard by the Apex Court and disposed of in November 2017, after AG KK Venugopal had told the Court that the prevention of custodial torture was a subject of serious consideration by the government..In his application, Kumar has stated that since the Court’s order of November 2017, there have been media reports of custodial torture almost on a daily basis. Calling upon the government to take action, it states,.“Failure of the Union Government to bridge the gap in the law by providing a comprehensive umbrella legislation to prevent custodial torture is a clear negation of its constitutional obligation.”.Citing the Court’s orders directing the Centre to legislate on subjects like mob violence and sexual harassment at the workplace, the applicant has prayed for a similar direction to be given in the instant case for preventing custodial torture and upholding the fundamental rights as guaranteed under the Constitution of India..Stating that the Right to Life under Article 21 of the Constitution guarantees not just animal existence but also includes right against torture, the application says,.“Article 21 of the Constitution also includes within its ambit a guarantee against torture and assault by the State or its functionaries. Custodial violence and torture violate this inviolable right with impunity.”.Terming the Apex Court as the ultimate protector of constitutional values and fundamental rights, the applicant has prayed for the Court to thus direct the Centre to frame a stand-alone and comprehensive legislation..The matter will be heard next in January 2019..In his petition that was disposed of, Kumar had contended that the Prevention of Torture Bill, 2010 – passed in the Lok Sabha to bring Indian laws at par with the United Nations Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, 1987 – should be reintroduced in the Parliament at the earliest to enable India to fulfil its international obligations under the various international conventions. However, the Indian government is yet to ratify the UN Convention..Senior Advocate Colin Gonsalves, who was appointed Amicus Curiae in Kumar’s petition said in a later interview,.“See, Ashwani Kumar’s petition was a good petition, he argued very well in the Supreme Court and all that, but he’s still under the wrong understanding that in order to ratify a Convention you must make a law. The United Nations has a hundred times clarified that it is not a precondition to ratification. In fact, once you ratify it, then the making of your law becomes easier, because there is a global process and you get inputs from other countries.”
