Why the New Criminal Laws Are a 'Posthumous Tribute to Lord Macaulay' https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZmGSvvq0KI8 Jul 14, 2024 The new criminal code and the manner in which it was rolled out has already garnered a lot of controversy. While the government has claimed that it wants to get rid of the laws of the colonial era, this promise has not been realised. Only 5-7% has been changed, says Kapil Sibal.
Congress's Sivaganga MP P. Chidambaram sheds light on the government aspect of the laws and how they are framed and brought to being.
Justice Madan Lokur highlights the constitutional and legal challenges with the new laws.
Justice Mukta Guptahas been speaking on these laws all over the country, also at the IAS Academy.
Who will answer the questions? https://indianexpress.com/article/opinion/columns/p-chidambaram-writes-who-will-answer-the-questions-9451830/ Is not the claim that the government has thrown out the ‘colonial legacy’ a hollow claim?
why was the time-honoured practice to make a reference to the Law Commission not followed?
Have the new laws recognised and incorporated the progressive principles laid down by the Supreme Court in landmark judgments delivered in the last 10 years?
Why has the new law retained ‘death penalty’ that has been abolished in many democratic countries? Why has the cruel and dehumanising punishment of ‘solitary confinement’ been introduced? Why has the offence of ‘adultery’ been brought back into the criminal law? Was it necessary to retain ‘defamation’ as a criminal offence? Was it not necessary to stipulate a period of limitation to lodge a criminal complaint of ‘defamation’? Why is same-sex relationship without the consent of the other person no longer an offence? Was it not necessary to define the punishment of ‘community
Why has the offence of ‘sedition’ been enlarged and retained?
Have the new laws given greater latitude to the police to arrest a person and seek the person’s police custody?
Is the provision that enables an FIR to be registered in any police station of the country, irrespective of the place of the offence, constitutional?