http://www.kafila.org/2006/10/31/doublethink-in-the-time-of-criminal-
reform/
Doublethink in the Time of Criminal Reform
By Lawrence Liang, October 31st, 2006
Orwell created a range of wonderful concepts in his dystopic novel
1984 to characterize the language of power. One such phrase
Doublethink referred to the ability to hold “two contradictory
beliefs in one’s mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them”
without being aware of their contradictions.
The latest addition to the vast repository of doublethinks in the
archives of the Indian state comes from the background note of the
new committee formed for the reform of the criminal justice system.
Barely a few years after the controversial Malimath Committee, yet
another committee has been formed under the chairmanship of Dr.
Madhava Menon (the founder of the National Law School in Bangalore).
The National Criminal Justice System Policy Drafting Committee
(“NCJSPDC”) has been constituted “taking into account changing
profile of the crime and criminal” We can safely assume in the
context of the global war against terror, what the changing profile
of the crime and the criminal refers to.
According to the background note, the motivation behind the setting
up of the NCJSPDC is as follows:
The goal is freedom from crime, protection of human rights and the
maintenance
of rule of law. The strategy is to send the message that crime does
not pay and violent crime will be ruthlessly dealt with under law.
The strategy is to assure the law abiding citizens that life and
liberty will be secured by the state at all costs and victims will
receive due consideration and justice. The strategy is to give the
police and the prosecution the tools to bring criminals to justice
effectively and expeditiously. Respect for human rights and the dual
system of law enforcement between the Centre and the States shall not
be allowed to dilute the efficiency and effectiveness of the system.
The role of criminal justice in national development and good
governance shall be promoted and redeemed.
So on the one hand, it is intended for the protection of human
rights, and at the same time respect for human right should not be
allowed to dilute the efficiency and effectiveness of the system.
Returning to Orwell, to engage in Doublethink requires us “To tell
deliberate lies while genuinely believing in them, to forget any fact
that has become inconvenient, and then, when it becomes necessary
again, to draw it back from oblivion for just so long as it is
needed, to deny the existence of objective reality and all the while
to take account of the reality which one denies—all this is
indispensably necessary. Even in using the word doublethink it is
necessary to exercise doublethink. For by using the word one admits
that one is tampering with reality; by a fresh act of doublethink one
erases this knowledge; and so on indefinitely, with the lie always
one leap ahead of the truth.”
The Committee has been formed with the belief that the present
criminal justice system is nor working, and in these tumultuous
times, there is a need for extra ordinary legislation. It cites the
Malimath Committee report which argued that
“There has been much patchy and piecemeal legislation and much more
adhoc policy making relating to terrorism or organized crime or
different types of victims such as women, children and Dalits for one
reason or the other. Yet, things have improved little for the various
kinds of victims and in the management of organized crimes or
terrorism. Success has been elusive. The Committee also feels– with
the greatest respect – that many of the orders of the various courts
on different issues, constituting judge-made law has also hindered
the criminal justice administration. It is therefore necessary for
Government to come out with a clear and coherent policy statement on
all major issues of criminal justice”.
Perhaps they were referring to judgments like D.K.Basu which laid
down the rights of prisoners, and comes heavily down on torture by
the police. Extraordinary times do indeed call for extraordinary
measures. An interesting historical equivalent is the debate on the
formation of the Sedition Committee of 1918 headed by Justice
Rowlatt. The initial terms of reference of the committee asked them
“to examine and consider the difficulties that have arisen in dealing
with such conspiracies and to advise as to the amendments, if any,
necessary in the ordinary criminal law in order to enable Government
to deal effectively with them.” They were referring to the failure of
the ordinary criminal justice system, and were instead more
comfortable with the kind of powers that had been granted to them via
extra ordinary legislations that were in force during the war.
The Rowlatt Committee, interestingly came up at the same time as the
decision by the British to ensure greater participation of Indians in
the administration. So liberal constitutional reform was accompanied
by the prospects of constitutionally sanctioned violence and force.
Another War, Another time, only the Doublethink survives
--
Kiran Jonnalagadda
http://jace.seacrow.com/
