A 2024 statute has come under the spotlight amidst protests in Delhi: the Public Examinations (Prevention of Unfair Means) Act, 2024. In a bid to allay protestors, it seems that this law is in line for amendments to give it more 'bite' if news reports are to be believed. Some steps have already been taken to boost the law's working by directing that prosecutions launched under it be handled by 'Fast Track Courts' — Delhi passed the necessary notification two days ago (23.07.2026).
It is fair to say that the news about amendments making this law stricter did not have the desired effect. Perhaps, it is a realisation that more laws do not matter. Perhaps, the realisation that the 2024 Act has been in place for a while now without results and it is not lacking in 'bite'. Perhaps, it is the knowledge that countless 'Fast Track Courts' have not made a difference in the past either to secure accountability through the system.
These are all good realisations to have. The 2024 Public Examinations Act, even with its proposed amendments, is yet another example of legislators adopting the cheapest option available to resolve a socio-political problem. The formula is simple. Show that you are dealing with an issue by releasing paper tigers in the form of a new statute, which sounds impressive and costs nothing but the cost of the paper it is printed on, but do not invest in resources which would be required to operationalise the law or solve the problem on ground. We have been here many times before.
In the present scenario, the point could not be starker. Robust public examinations would rely a lot on robust institutions conducting them. Investing in this would presumably prevent leaks, in turn reducing the need for hyper-punitive laws to punish prospective offenders. Surrounded by protests, the government has sacked 47 officers of the National Testing Agency (with very little clarity or cause), indicating that all may not have been not right under that roof. Which then leads to the following questions: What accountability and oversight existed for the institution? Lets see. Is there a governing law for it? No. Is there any delegated legislation / rule / regulation controlling its functioning? No. The NTA It is an 'autonomous body' under pure government control. In other words, no accountability for the institution itself, just pure opacity.
There is a lot more to criticise about the 2024 Act. It is a poorly drafted law with key terms going undefined and overlaps with other laws, which will create obstacles for any eventual prosecution whenever it is launched. It is a central law with limited coverage. Solely driven to satiate the lust for a punitive response to a bad event, it does not concern itself with the victims — the countless students — by (for instance) delineating measures for distributing the properties attached and confiscated upon conviction to them. It is telling that the Act itself did not create special courts to deal with prosecutions and the history of 'Fast Track Courts' demonstrates the measure may prove counterproductive and hurt ordinary citizens more by clogging up other parts of the criminal justice system. The list goes on.
The limited point here is to remind ourselves that whenever we see a statute being touted as the answer by a government in the aftermath of a crisis of confidence in public institutions, chances are that it is a distraction by calling upon your baser, more retributive, instincts.
No comments:
Post a Comment