Govt Defends Wangchuk NSA Detention Before Supreme Court
Govt Defends Wangchuk NSA Detention Before Supreme Court
Centre defends NSA detention of climate activist Wangchuk, citing safeguards and inter-state transfer rules as the Supreme Court weighs the case.
Centre defends the detention of climate activist Sonam Wangchuk under the National Security Act, telling the Supreme Court that all safeguards were followed and that the action is preventive to stop him from repeating controversial statements.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta invoked Section 5 of the NSA, which authorises the 'appropriate government' to regulate the place and conditions of detention. He said a detainee may be moved from one place of detention to another, even across states, by order of the appropriate government, and said this would explain Wangchuk's transfer to Rajasthan.
Wangchuk was detained on September 26, following protests demanding Statehood and Sixth Schedule status for Ladakh that left four people dead and about 90 injured. He has since been moved to the Jodhpur Central Jail in Rajasthan. The government argued there was material against him and that the material was not irrelevant; the legal review of its sufficiency is limited, with procedural safeguards designed to prevent arbitrary action.
The Supreme Court heard that procedural safeguards exist to protect individuals from arbitrary action, and that those safeguards were scrupulously adhered to in this case. The government emphasised that the NSA provides checks and balances and can be used to maintain public order and security in sensitive border areas.
The petitioners argue for greater transparency and question the scope of the act, but the Centre maintained that the detention was lawful and in line with the act’s aims. The case highlights the broader debate over security measures, civil liberties, and regional autonomy in a region where tensions with neighboring states add to the stakes.
As the hearing proceeds, observers are watching how the court weighs the balance between national security and fundamental rights, and whether the NSA's use in this instance will set precedent for future inter-state detentions.
