The BJP's proposal to re-enact POTA in order to fight terrorism is equally farcical. POTA was in force when major terrorist attacks, including the one against Parliament, were successfully carried out. Perhaps the most conspicuous achievement of the POTA law was Jayalalithaa's successful arrest of her political rival, MDMK leader Vaiko. Given the propensity of India's politicians to misuse, subvert and bypass laws, it is unlikely that any law by itself could successfully counter terrorism.
Politicians need to be reminded how, in the Jain Hawala case, only two conduits of illegal funds to terrorists received minor jail sentences. Over a decade later the businessmen who facilitated the transfer of illegal funds were held guilty and slapped a fine of Rs 30 crores. The case originally filed under the defunct TADA law (as stringent as POTA), was converted to a corruption case simply to avoid embarrassment to over 40 involved national political leaders of various parties. The aborted TADA probe helped a minor separatist, Salauddin, to escape unscathed. He flowered to become, today, the Pakistan-based head of the Hizbul Mujahideen. Thanks to the suspended TADA probe to protect politicians, another hawala operator, Moolchand Shah, also escaped. Only recently was he convicted for involvement in the 1993 Mumbai bomb blast case. Years after the Jain Hawala case probe ended, Tariq Bhai, the foreign fund donor named in that case, who was never questioned, was identified by British authorities as a prime source of terrorist funding in Kashmir. Mr Jaitley would surely recall that case? His considerable legal skills were deployed to get a number of involved politicians off the hook. Every single politician was acquitted for lack of sufficient evidence.
There was nothing unique in the political-terrorist nexus revealed by the Jain Hawala case. In Andhra, in Jharkhand and in some other states the fact that politicians protect Maoists to augment votes is acknowledged. In Tamil Nadu and in Karnataka politicians for many years protected the serial killer, Veerappan. He funded terrorists based in the jungle trail through which he transported ivory to Myanmar and China for his illegal smuggling trade. In Kashmir, Assam and the North-East, politicians seeking secure votes have been credibly accused of colluding with terrorists. Many more examples of politician-terrorist nexus can be summoned. So, would the mere re-enactment of POTA or the establishment of a federal agency effectively end terrorism?
For any serious war against terror, three prime requirements are essential. First, political corruption has to be curtailed to-- among other things -- prevent leaders becoming vulnerable to blackmail by terrorist elements.Second, investigative agencies would have to be insulated from political interference by introducing systemic change. Andthird, Panchayati Raj would have to be strengthened by creating a new, primary level of the police force accountable to local bodies both in village and in town. This level of local policing could, apart from pursuing other duties, prevent the creation of undercover terrorist cells in one's own locality. For a successful war against terror, the creation of greater participatory governance would be necessary.
In the absence of such measures, any real war against terror is illusory. To hope that the present crop of politicians in government and in opposition could introduce such change would be equally unrealistic. In the circumstances, India may have to keep living with terror that will continue to bleed our nation until our political culture is radically transformed.