TOUGH LAW POSES TOUGH QUESTION
Font Size 
Anti-hijack law dilemma: Lives first or nation first?
Published on Fri, Feb 15, 2008 at 07:57, Updated on Fri, Feb 15, 2008 at 10:33 in Nation section
Tags: Anti-hijack Law, UPA Government
Related Stories
Strike at one oil firm ends, others to follow suit - Satyam: A new storm in India's cup of woes
- 'Govt, regulator ignored warning about Satyam'
- Maoists drag Bachchans into Pashupatinath row
- Pak role in 26/11 attacks possible: Imran Khan
- US sees 26/11 as model for future terrorism
- Biden to visit Pak | Don't accuse Pak sans proof: Mulford
- India convinced of Pak army role in Mumbai attacks
- Shiv Sena snubs Karkare's kin for being soft on Kasab
- Noida rape: Boy confesses, Panchayat says not guilty
Photogallery
 |  |
The UPA Government has plans to put in place a new and tough anti-hijack law. The Government says it is ready to say that India does not negotiate with hijackers. The new law proposes getting tougher with hijackers, allowing for shooting down of hijacked aircraft, and no negotiation.
But is this a practical law? The question that was asked on CNN-IBN's Face The Nation was: Should India adopt a no-negotiation policy with hijackers?
To try and answer the question, on the panel of experts were Human Rights Advocate Vrinda Grover; a passenger aboard the hijacked plane IC-814, Saidal Kar; and Strategic Affairs Analyst at the Centre for Policy Research, Brahma Chellaney.
Humiliating Hijack History
The 1999 Kandahar hijacking of Indian Airlines flight IC-814 is a rather humiliating example of terrible failure of India's security systems. It was the longest hijack drama involving an Indian plane.
When it seemed that the plane could land in Amritsar, the Crisis Management Group acted slowly, without any sense of urgency.
At Amritsar, Central negotiators failed to join NSG Commandos on time. Apparently these NSG Commandos as well as the negotiators were stuck in a traffic jam. Also, Amritsar Air Traffic Control failed to immobilise IC-814.
Later there was utter confusion when the plane landed in Dubai and then later took off again.
| NEW PROPOSALS | |
 UPA government plans to amend Anti-Hijacking Act of 1982 | |
| Proposal for a no-negotiation policy with hijackers | |
| Proposal for death penalty to hijackers | |
| New measures would treat hijacking as "an act of aggression" | |
| New measures to entail directions to domestic airports to immobilise hijacked plane if it lands | |
| New measures flow from anti-hijacking policy cleared by Cabinet Committee on Security in Aug '05 | |
| Proposal to shoot down hostile plane if there is evidence that the plane is likely to be used as missile | |
| If an aircraft registered in India is hijacked, personnel at all airports will have power to immobilise it | Airborne hijacked plane will be surrounded by fighter aircrafts within Indian airspace |
| Policy lays down detailed coordination chain, starting from ATC to IAF to Crisis Management, ending at CCS |
What the present Anti-Hijacking Act says:
- Hijacker shall be punished with imprisonment for life
- Hijacker shall also be liable to fine
[ Single Page View ]
| Ads by Google |
| Related Ads: | |
Read Comment | Post Comment
Red fort incident was failure, if it was succeded india would have got new blood in Politics and would have
Read Comment
WE MUST ACT LIKE ISRAEL IN DEALING TERRORISTS .BUT WE SHOULD SEE OUR INDIANS AS FELLOW BROTHERS NOT IN ACCORDANCE
Read Comment
The law should be enforced immediately..we can't afford to let free terrorists who will come back again and claim more
Read Comment
Both are important to us as a nation looking to go forward. Suggest,the best method to tackle this situation is
Read Comment
Any such law will give wide powers to the governemnt. No MP or MLA shall be allowed to force government
Read Comment
Read more comment »