Bci says no immediate need to protest new criminal laws seeks details from bar

Bci says no immediate need to protest new criminal laws seeks details from bar

With just three days to go for the three new criminal laws to kick in across the nation, the statutory Bar Council of India (BCI) has told Bar associations and the legal fraternity that there is no ‘immediate necessity’ for agitation, protests or strikes over the issue.

The BCI would initiate discussions with the Union govt represented by the home minister and the law minister to convey the concerns of the legal fraternity, said the BCI secretary Simanto Sen in a press release on Wednesday.

In this regard, the BCI said it had taken note of the fact that Bar associations have signalled their intent to engage in indefinite agitations and protests unless these laws are suspended and subjected to thorough nationwide discussions, including a comprehensive review by the Parliament.

In a rather late response to the nationwide Bar unrest and threats of court boycotts, the BCI invited the associations and senior advocates to submit their suggestions on ‘specific provisions of the new law’ which they deem ‘unconstitutional’ or ‘detrimental’ to the criminal justice system.

“Upon receiving specific suggestions from the Bar associations, the BCI will constitute a committee comprising senior advocates, former judges, impartial social activists and journalists to propose necessary amendments to these new laws,”

The release said the BCI would also seek the intervention of the Union environment minister Bupendra Yadav, as he is an advocate to mediate in the matter.

The BCI said it had adopted a resolution on June 26, acknowledging the numerous representations received from Bar associations and state Bar councils across the nation, expressing strong objection to the newly introduced criminal laws – the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita replacing the Indian Penal Code, The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita replacing the Code of Criminal Procedure and the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam replacing the Evidence Act.

“Concerns have been raised that several provisions of these new laws are perceived to be anti-people, more draconian than the colonial-era laws they intend to replace and pose a serious threat to the fundamental rights of the citizens,” the statement said.

Several Bar associations have also called for a fresh examination of the provisions of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) and the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), apart from having a relook at the three new criminal laws, asserting that these laws contravene the principle of fundamental rights and natural justice, the statement read.