It's Not POTA. Yet

The outcome in the Rajya Sabha was expected but had becomeclose with the fact that lots of opposition members were sick or out of town,but in the end the result was on predicted lines -- the bill to ratifyPrevention of Terrorism (Second) Ordinance, (POTO), 2002, already approved bythe Lok Sabha, was also put to vote and in a division, the motion was rejectedby the Upper House.

As many as 113 members voted against the bill while 98supported it.

During the vote three Congress, one DMK and two AIADMK memberswere not present.

Replying to an acrimonious debate, Home Minister L K Advanistoutly defended the POTO saying it was essential because of a sea change in thesecurity scenario in the face of cross border terrorism in the country.

Instead of terrorists languishing in jails, the measure wouldallow proper prosecution and conviction of terrorists by courts, he said andasserted that Government had incorporated all possible safeguards to prevent itsmisuse unlike the National Security Act (NSA).

For preventive detentions, the provisions under POTO were morespecific, he said observing that wireless intercepts have been made admissibleas evidence to ensure conviction.

Going by the suggestions given by the Supreme Court on thedefunct TADA, of the 26 people booked under POTO in Jammu and Kashmir, tenhave been released on bail, he claimed, which proves that the proposed law wasnot as harsh as was being made out to be by the Opposition.

Joint Session Now

"The Congress is responsible for the defeat of thisimportant bill and now the only way out of this is to convene a joint session ofParliament so that the country is able to tackle the menace of terrorism whichthe nation has been facing for over two decades," BJP spokesman V KMalhotra charged.

He said this defeat of POTO would "only send a wrongsignal to the world that the country, which had been facing the menace ofterrorism, has opponents within against a law for dealing with thisproblem".

Meanwhile, the home minister L K Advani maintained that the governmentcould foresee the defeat of the Prevention of Terrorism Bill in Rajya Sabha butis determined to get it passed through a Joint Session of Parliament on Tuesday,

"The difference was so wide, the strength of the non-NDAmembers was considerable and there was a gap of about 50 .... but we tried tomobilise as much as we could and we lost by only 13 or 14 votes," Advanisaid after the Bill got defeated in the Upper House.

"The outcome was broadly on the expected lines. But weare determined to pursue," Advani said.

Only Twice Before

A joint session to get a Bill through has been used only twice:by Jawaharlal Nehru govt in 1961 and by the Morarji Desai govt in 1978.

Significantly, Nehru had a majority in both the Houses andstill he called a joint session to accommodate ‘‘honest differences ofopinion’’ on the Dowry Prohibition Bill. Nor did he bind his party toa whip. Rajya Sabha had passed a version of the Bill according to which‘‘direct and indirect payments’’ were banned while the Lok Sabha saidthat including ‘‘indirect payments’’ was ‘‘oppressive.’’

The joint session had passed the Rajya Sabha version.

Morarji Desai govt., on the other hand, wanted to scrap acentralised Banking Service Commission set up by Indira Gandhi during Emergencyon the lines of the UPSC. Congress-dominated Rajya Sabha had rejected the Billbut a joint session gave them the requisite numbers -- which is what A.B.Vajpayee's NDA hopes to get. Interestingly, A B Vajpayee is the only sitting MPto have participated in both the joint sessions.

In case of a joint session now, planned for March 26, of thetotal strength of around 782 in both Houses, the NDA is likely to have thesupport of nearly 425, as the Trinamool Congress is likely to abstain. TheOpposition would be left with around 350.

Such joint sessions had taken place twice before. The first was on May 6 and 9,1961 when the Dowry Prohibition Bill 1959 was passed and second to pass theBanking Commission (Repeal) Law on 16 May 1978.

The Bill, replacing the Prevention of Terrorism Ordinance, lapses on April 8,six weeks after commencement of the current session.