Our experiences of draconian laws in our country are very painful, primarily because those have been largely used as tools of oppression and vendetta against political opponents.

Fighting extremism does not have to involve an abridgment of the rights of citizens guaranteed by the Constitution. And should there be the need for any special measure dictated by the demands of national security, there are provisons of law that the government can resort to, on case to case basis. Giving a carte blanche to the agencies will subject the citizens to the possibility of harassment against which one cannot take recourse to the law.

Apart from the fact that it will be an invasion of privacy of the common man, our fears are compounded by the demonstrated proclivity, of many in the government and the administration, to gag the media; we wonder whether this would not be used to muzzle the media, the press in particular. The worrisome aspect is that under the provision, the government can force a telephone service provider to suspend service for any length of time. Nobody can put it past the government to use it against journalists and other media men, whose primary mode of communications happens to be the telephone.

While the question of national security must reign supreme, no civilised democratic society can endure curtailment of its basic rights, particularly through those enactments whose underlying philosophy may be less than holy.

We look upon the unprecedented measure with trepidation, condemn it and urge the government to scrap it sooner than later.