<p>Advani headlined his latest blog posting, "Emergency of 1975 akin to Nazi rule". Though he has not explained on his blog why he chose to use the term, he quotes Justice H R Khanna, the only dissenting Supreme Court judge, who had used it in the case where the Government of India had appealed against a high court judgement in favour of those detained during the Emergency under MISA (Maintenance of Internal Security Act).<br /><br />"It has been argued that suspending the right of a person to move any Court for the enforcement of right to life and personal liberty is done under a constitutional provision and therefore it cannot be said that the resulting situation would mean the absence of the rule of law.....<br /><br />".....In one sense, it might in that event be argued that even if lives of hundreds of persons are taken capriciously and maliciously without the authority of law, it is enforcement of the above enacted law. Thus, in a purely formal sense, any system or norm based on a hierarchy of orders, even the organized mass murders of Nazi regime can qualify as law," Justice H R Khanna said his judgement.<br /><br />He was referring to Article 21 of the Constitution which guarantees right not only to personal liberty but also to life. Advani states in his blog that 1,10,806 persons were detained during the Emergency.<br /><br />"Of these 34,988 were detained under the Maintenance of Internal Security Act whereunder no grounds were to be given to the prisoner," he said. Several of those who were detained had filed Habeas Corpus petitions in high courts which were challenged by the government in Supreme Court, he said.</p>
<p>Advani headlined his latest blog posting, "Emergency of 1975 akin to Nazi rule". Though he has not explained on his blog why he chose to use the term, he quotes Justice H R Khanna, the only dissenting Supreme Court judge, who had used it in the case where the Government of India had appealed against a high court judgement in favour of those detained during the Emergency under MISA (Maintenance of Internal Security Act).<br /><br />"It has been argued that suspending the right of a person to move any Court for the enforcement of right to life and personal liberty is done under a constitutional provision and therefore it cannot be said that the resulting situation would mean the absence of the rule of law.....<br /><br />".....In one sense, it might in that event be argued that even if lives of hundreds of persons are taken capriciously and maliciously without the authority of law, it is enforcement of the above enacted law. Thus, in a purely formal sense, any system or norm based on a hierarchy of orders, even the organized mass murders of Nazi regime can qualify as law," Justice H R Khanna said his judgement.<br /><br />He was referring to Article 21 of the Constitution which guarantees right not only to personal liberty but also to life. Advani states in his blog that 1,10,806 persons were detained during the Emergency.<br /><br />"Of these 34,988 were detained under the Maintenance of Internal Security Act whereunder no grounds were to be given to the prisoner," he said. Several of those who were detained had filed Habeas Corpus petitions in high courts which were challenged by the government in Supreme Court, he said.</p>