Uncertain temper

Sir — Recently, Najma Heptullah adjourned the Rajya Sabha, angry at Kapil Sibal for “arguing” with her. Sibal had made, by any standards, a mild protest, as Heptullah did not allow him to speak although he had sent her a chit seeking permission. A few days later, she overlooked a special mention by Pranab Mukherjee to give precedence to unlisted business by Hema Malini (“Dream girl first in House of chivalry”, Dec 20). After being deputy speaker for so long, has Heptullah begun to consider the Rajya Sabha her fiefdom? Or does it have something to do with Mukherjee and Sibal being Congressmen?

Yours faithfully,
J. Basu, Calcutta

Terror trap

Sir — The Supreme Court’s decision to uphold the Prevention of Terrorism Act is a step in the right direction. But it will be hard on the apologists for human rights, for whom terrorists’ rights take precedence over civilians’ rights, and for political parties which stalled Parliament in protest against the “unconstitutional”, “draconian” law. The apex court has endorsed the government’s view that existing laws were not enough to deal with the complexities of new age terrorism. But it has also said that mere moral support to banned organizations was not sufficient for prosecution under POTA and that criminal intentions must be proved.

The POTA amendment bill, passed by the Lok Sabha on December 15, is in keeping with this line of thought and seeks to safeguard against “likely misuse” of the law.

The other important point raised by the court was the need to protect the identity of witnesses, so that people may testify against terrorists. Also, the government must make use of the latest technological advances in its fight against terrorism.

Yours faithfully,
V.A. Gopala, Bangalore

Sir — The government tends to bypass objections to bills it favours even if it is from its own allies. Take the passage of the POTA amendment bill, which has been misused by J. Jayalalithaa to detain the National Democratic Alliance’s Vaiko. Ironically, the women’s reservation bill, though publicly supported by all parties, is in cold storage in the name of creating a consensus.

Yours faithfully,
Madhu Agrawal, Delhi

After the fall

Sir — I agree with Biswapriya Purkayastha that The Telegraph need not have gone to town over the capture of Saddam Hussein (“Easy catch, in the end, Dec 17). Perhaps some hard Yankee PR was at work. I had noticed a similar bias in coverage during the run-up to the invasion of Iraq and after, when photographs of American soldiers kissing their loved ones before leaving for duty were published, along with their names, units and so on. Have such human-interest pictures of Indian units deployed in Kashmir or the North-east ever been carried?

Yours faithfully,
Debesh Banerjee, Port Blair

Sir — The continuing guerrilla warfare after Saddam Hussein’s capture shows the Iraqi people’s anger and hatred of the occupation army. The Americans should leave Iraq and let the people form their own government and prosecute the ousted leader.

Yours faithfully,
Lalatendu Rout, Hazaribagh

Sir — The way the Americans are treating Saddam Hussein is deplorable. Even if they had to show him to the world, it could have been done in a more dignified manner. Also when he accuses Hussein of being a murderer, George W. Bush needs to be reminded that the United States of America is the only country to have used nuclear weapons on innocent civilians so far.

Yours faithfully,
Prashant Solomon, New Delhi

Sir — Saddam Hussein’s capture has given an undeserving morale booster to George W. Bush and his Republican supporters. All this will only make Osama bin Laden and his jihadi army all the more determined in their hatred of the non-Muslim world, primarily the US.

Yours faithfully,
Ian D’souza, Mumbai