Christian council reiterates need for Communal Violence Bill revision

The Sonia Gandhi led National Advisory Council (NAC) has been asked to revise the proposed Communal Violence Prevention Bill by taking into account the concerns of religious minorities.

The All India Christian Council (aicc) - a coalition of Christian denominations, organisations and lay leaders - said there was legitimate concerns on the effectiveness of the 2005 and the 2009 drafts of the Bill which does not define "communal violence" adequately.

"Firstly, it construes communal violence as disharmony between two different communities, or mass rioting by one community against another, but it does not recognise the process by which communal tension or hatred is incited, and it does not recognise the phenomenon of state complicity in the incitement or execution of communal violence," said John Dayal, Secretary General of aicc.

He said the Bill inadequately covers the possible range of offences which might constitute "communal violence" including specific forms of sexual violence, and the implications of this context for evidentiary standards in the investigative process.

The Communal Violence (Prevention, Control and Rehabilitation of Victims) Bill, 2009, was first introduced on 26 November 2005, and has undergone a series of revisions, which include the adoption of a number of recommendations issued by the National Commission for Minorities (NCM).

It is expected to be introduced in the Lok Sabha in 2010, having received Cabinet approval in December 2009.

Says John Dayal, who is also a member of the Prime Minister's National Integration Council, the Bill does not provide for sufficient safeguards against the poor or discriminatory exercise of power by those responsible for protecting the rights of victims, which is a recurrent problem in cases of communal violence.

Furthermore, he says the Bill should provide additional measures to protect witnesses or victims from intimidation and it should set out a uniform, binding scheme for the provision of compensation to victims of communal violence, to address the inconsistencies shown in previous cases.

Citing the Christian community's experience in the aftermath of Kandhamal violence, Dayal suggests few changes in the Bill.

"The Fast Track courts should be set up outside the affected area, preferably in a neighbouring district, and in special cases, in an adjoining state to remove any inference with the course of justice," he says.

In addition, the Judges appointed should be subjected to review for their performances by superior courts and special public prosecutors be appointed at government expense out of a panel whetted by civil society and survivors-victims.

Survivor Victims, he says, must be allowed to file additional FIRs other than those filed by police suo motu and must also be allowed to cross examine defence witness and intervene properly in the judicial court process.

Dayal said any Law to be relevant it must empower the people, specially the survivor-victims. "It must in no way further empower the State and the political apparatus to harass religious minorities."