Justice Hosbet Suresh* on his opposition to POTO
*Former Judge, Bombay High Court, Vice President of Lok Raj Sangathan

Interviewd by Roshni Olivera

Why are you against POTO?
POTO is the same as the Terrorist and Disruptive Acivities (Prevention) Act (TADA). It can easily be misused. In the case of TADA, over 77,000 were arrested all over the country. Eventually, over 72,000 were released for want of evidence. But that was after they spent years in detention. Even in the case of the remaining people, the conviction rate was just 1.8 per cent. I don’t think POTO can be any different.

The government has been reiterating that POTO cannot be misused.
I don’t agree because the safeguards are only on paper. In TADA, confessions were taken in writing. In POTO, confessions have to be recorded by an officer not less than the rank of superintendent of police (SP). What is the guarantee that an SP will be any different from other policeman? Also, in POTO, confessions can be recorded on tape where there is no guarantee of authenticity.

But POTO asks for confessions to be recorded in a free and voluntary atmosphere.
Where will we find such an atmosphere in our police stations?
POTO’s guidelines also say that the accused should be told he is not bound to make a confession. But do police officers give that liberty?

Aren’t existing laws inadequate to combat terrorism?
In the case of POTO, there is no definition of terrorism. It only defines terrorist acts, and all these are offences including against existing laws like Indian Penal Code, Arms Act, Explosives Act and others. I don’t think we need a seperate law to combat terrorism.