Prevention of Torture Bill: Better late than never

The government has finally realised that mental torture and trauma is barbaric, which is why it has proposed the Prevention of Torture Bill, 2010. It is good that better sense has prevailed, but the delay in appreciating that mental agony violates a person’s right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution speaks volumes about government apathy.

The government decided to move a proposal before parliament for the Prevention of Torture Bill, 2010, because it wanted to be in the same league as countries that ratified the UN’s Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman and Degrading Treatment or Punishment in 1975. India was one of the signatories to the resolution.

In these 35 years, there’s been an increase in human rights violations and custodial deaths in India. This is as much due to an increase in terrorism and internal aggression as it is due to the tendency of law enforcers to pull the trigger at the slightest provocation.

Needless to say, the families of people who died in custody or in fake encounters are doomed to suffer trauma for the rest of their lives.

That a victim of trauma and mental agony is also a victim of torture has, according to courts, found place in the list of people who suffered police excesses. Some compensation, if not adequate, has been given in certain cases where innocent people were made to suffer long trials on fabricated charges. But no amount can compensate the loss of time and no award can be good enough to assuage the feelings of hurt intentionally caused by the state.

It is now hoped that the new anti-torture law would be a handy tool for people who suffer because of the omissions and commissions of insensitive law enforcement agencies. It will add strength to Article 21, making it a constitutional guarantee to live a life with dignity, without trauma and torture.