annual report print final.qxd - Asian Centre for Human Rights

INDIA HUMAN RIGHTS REPORT 2005 Tamil Nadu
POTA. 31 However, on 31 March 2003, the
Central government made a correction to
its earlier stand, saying Vaiko’s speech
delivered on 29 June 2002 “if properly
interpreted and read in the entire context of
the speech and the surrounding
circumstances, does not attract Section 21
of the Prevention of Terrorism Act
(POTA)”. 32 Then Attorney General, Soli
Sorabjee also gave a clarification that mere
expression of moral support per se does not
tantamount to breach of Section 21 of
POTA, so long as the individual concerned
does not provide actual aid to the terrorist
organisation. 33 On 16 December 2003, the
Supreme Court endorsed the Attorney
General’s interpretation of the section 21.
On 7 February 2004, Vaiko was released
from the Vellor central prison before the
Lok Sabha elections. 35 On 7 May 2004, the
Supreme Court stayed all further
proceedings pending against Vaiko and his
colleagues before the designated POTA
Court. 36 Subsequently, on 10 August 2004,
the Tamil Nadu government decided to
withdraw POTA cases against them and
filed a petition to this effect in the POTA
court. 37 However, on 3 September 2004, the
POTA court declined to drop cases against
Vaiko and his colleagues holding that the
Central Review Committee’s decision that
there was no prima facie case against them
was “arbitrary” and “premature”. 38
On 9 July 2002, eight DMK
partymen- Madurai Ganesan, Alagu
Sundaram, Ganesamurthy, Veera
Ilavarasan, Bhoominathan, Pulavar
Sivanthiappan, P S Maniam and
Nagarajan- were arrested under POTA for
allegedly making speeches in support of
the banned LTTE at a public meeting at
Tirumangalam in Madurai District on 29
June 2002. 39
On 24 November 2003, the police
arrested 15-year-old, G. Prabhakaran
along with 25 others apparently because
they could not locate his father,
Gurusamy, a suspected Naxalite. A case
was filed against him in the Othankarai
Police Station under various sections of
the Indian Penal Code, Explosives Act
and Arms Act, in addition to the POTA.
He was presented before the Oothankarai
Judicial Magistrate on 25 November
2003 and was remanded to judicial
custody without checking if he was a
minor. The boy’s date of birth as per the
school transfer certificate was 11 May
1987. When Prabhakaran was produced
before the Uthangkarai judicial
magistrate, he was “mechanically
remanded to judicial custody” and was
lodged along with the Naxalite40 prisoners. However, the Krishnagiri
principal sessions judge, S. Ashok
Kumar, granted him bail, observing that
the school certificate would prevail over
the result of a radiological examination
conducted to determine the boy’s age. In
his 137-page order on March 18, Justice
K Sampath concluded that the
Prabhakaran should have been tried only
under the Juvenile Justice (Care and
Protection) Act, 2000. The court ruled
that the Juvenile Justice Act would
prevail over POTA. 41
227