Ban hearing on SIMI concludes

New Delhi, July 28 (UNI) The counsel for Students' Islamic Movement of India (SIMI) and the Central Government wound up today their arguments before the tribunal, constituted under Unalwful Activities Prevention Act to hear arguments over the ban imposed by the Central Government on the outfit on February 8 this year.

Trideep Pias, arguing for SIMI, continued his opposition to the claim of privilege over secret documents by the Central Government on ground of public interest.

Siddharth Mridul argued for the Central Government that the privilege over secret documents has found support in a judgement by seven-judge Constitution Bench (SP Gupta case 1982) of the apex court which said the court could not allow the secret information to be shared.

However, Trideep said the judgement was more about an absolute privilege than partial privilege.

''In absolute privilege even the judge is not allowed access to the information. While in partial privilege only the party is denied access to the information,'' he elaborated.

Adding further, he said he would be happy if the Central Government would press for SP Gupta's case.

He also argued that the Supreme Court's judgement in Sukhdev Singh laid down the principles on how to claim privileges.

''One can't claim blanket privilege as the Government is doing in the case because they have little more to show,'' he said.

Siddharth Mridul said before the tribunal that definition of unlawful activities under the governing Act was of widest possible scope.

But Trideep disagreed and quoted from the Parliament debate over the Act to prove what the Parliamentarians had intended.

''Ideological support to a movement is one thing and actively supporting a territorial part for seccession is another,'' he argued.

Trideep also questioned the several discrepancies between the stand of the Central Government and the revelations from the cross-examination.

UNI SSS KD ND2058