Mr. M. R. Masani's intervention in the course of the discussion on the Preventive Detention (Continuance) Bill, 1960, in the Lok Sabha on 5th December, 1960.

Summary

In this intervention in the Lok Sabha debate on the Preventive Detention (Continuance) Bill, 1960, M. R. Masani states that he and his party oppose the principle of preventive detention. He argues that executive detention without charge or trial threatens individual liberty and democratic government, and asks the Home Minister to replace what he calls a hasty improvisation with a carefully considered measure that defends democracy against authoritarian aggression.

Masani distinguishes preventive detention from ordinary criminal prosecution, emphasizing that detention deprives a person of liberty without first producing them before a court. He invokes Britain’s wartime experience, including Herbert Morrison’s release of Oswald Mosley, and quotes Winston Churchill’s warning that executive detention without charge is a foundation of totalitarian government and should be used only in extreme danger. He then challenges the government’s reliance on the Munshi Committee report in the case of Master Tara Singh, arguing that the report found no sufficient justification for detention on the specific allegations of planned violence and conspiracy with Pakistan. The intervention ends with Masani urging that Tara Singh’s detention be terminated.

Key points

• Masani declares opposition to the principle of preventive detention and to the Bill under discussion.
• He argues that detention without charge, trial, or judicial judgment violates individual liberty and the rule of law.
• He distinguishes preventive detention from ordinary criminal prosecution, in which an accused person is charged and tried in court.
• He contends that executive detention powers should exist, if at all, only under extreme danger and with vigilant parliamentary oversight.
• He cites Britain’s wartime treatment of Oswald Mosley to challenge the government’s analogy between wartime detention and the present situation.
• He disputes the use of the K. M. Munshi Committee report to justify Master Tara Singh’s continued detention.
• He maintains that the report found no evidence supporting the charge of planned violence and no adequate basis for continued detention.