Government apathy almost let SIMI off

NEW DELHI: The Centre averted a major embarrassment when it secured an interim order from the Supreme Court to continue the ban on SIMI. But a look at the Unlawful Activities (Prevention ) Tribunal���s order makes it clear that the Centre made no serious effort for validating the ban on an outfit that, by the government���s own admission, has over the last few years morphed from a fundamentalist group into a serious terror threat.

The order of the tribunal, headed by Justice Geeta Mittal , is a scathing indictment of the casual approach of not just the home ministry officials , but also IB officials and intelligence units of states.

Consider these facts from the tribunal���s 263-page order:

In a shocking instance of laziness, bureaucrats reproduced verbatim a two-yearold notification while seeking extension of the ban. This, despite the fact that an earlier tribunal had pointed out several deficiencies in the 2006 notification. The government, which considers terror as war on India, did not even purge the shortcomings in the 2008 order.

A senior official who deposed before the tribunal to justify the ban on the alleged terror outfit was not aware of crucial facts of the case.

The accounts of 75 witnesses , including that of IB officials, lacked crucial details . They fumbled when quizzed by the tribunal, Justice Mittal has recorded.

CASUAL APPROACH

Tribunal���s Scathing Remarks

2008 notification extending ban on SIMI almost identical to 2006 notification, doesn���t address deficiencies in 2006 order On April 29, Centre tells tribunal last 4 paras of notification are grounds for ban. On July 30, it backtracks, saying grounds for ban are contained in first 3 paras A senior official appears as witness to defend govt stand but says he isn't aware of case details.

Doesn't even seek adjournment to brush up on facts Crucial facts about recoveries from alleged SIMI members, like dates of offences and FIR details, not mentioned Most allegations made in background note aren���t backed by depositions.

(Courtesy: Timesofindia.com)