AIMIM president Asaduddin Owaisi has launched a sharp critique of India's anti-terror legislation, the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), following the Supreme Court's decision to deny bail to activist Umar Khalid. Owaisi's remarks, made on January 11, 2026, directly implicated both the Congress and the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) in the creation and expansion of a law he claims erodes constitutional freedoms.
Owaisi's Dual Attack on Congress and BJP
Owaisi did not mince words while assigning responsibility for the current state of the UAPA. He pointed out that the law was originally introduced during the tenure of the Congress-led United Progressive Alliance (UPA) government. His criticism, however, extended to the ruling BJP, which he accused of significantly strengthening the act through amendments in 2019.
These amendments, according to Owaisi, granted extensive powers to the National Investigation Agency (NIA) and introduced provisions allowing the government to designate individuals as terrorists. He argued that this process lacks adequate legal safeguards, creating a system where bail becomes exceptionally difficult to secure in cases labelled as terror-related.
UAPA: A Tool for Prolonged Incarceration?
The Hyderabad MP expressed grave concern over the practical application of the UAPA. He stressed that the law has effectively become an instrument for ensuring prolonged detention without trial, severely impacting the fundamental right to liberty. Owaisi emphasized that this trend disproportionately affects the youth of the country.
By highlighting the case of Umar Khalid, who has been in custody under the UAPA for several years, Owaisi aimed to illustrate his point about the law's role in extended incarceration. He argued that the repeated denial of bail, facilitated by the stringent provisions of the UAPA, undermines the presumption of innocence until proven guilty.
Calls for a Serious Legislative Review
Concluding his statement, Asaduddin Owaisi called for an urgent and serious review of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act. His appeal is grounded in the need to balance national security concerns with the protection of constitutional rights. He implied that the current form of the law tilts this balance excessively, allowing it to be used in ways that may not align with its original intent.
This intervention from a prominent opposition leader places the spotlight back on one of India's most stringent security laws, setting the stage for further political and legal debate on its future amendments and implementation.
