Mr. Chairman, Sir, thank you very much for giving me this opportunity.

Sir, as correctly mentioned by the hon. Minister, the scope of this Bill is very limited. There is only a slight modification replacing one word with another word, ‘military law’ in place of ‘martial law’. The Standing Committee on this subject has also given the reason for that.
Martial law is not found relevant in the Indian context and it should be replaced with the word ‘military law’. It was also stated that the Ministry of Law and Justice was consulted in this matter, and that the Ministry advised that the proposed change should be made in this Act. That part is okay.

But, Sir, this small piece of legislation brings a very serious thing to our notice, as correctly mentioned by others. Sir, the editorial written in the daily, The Hindu on 14th September, 2010 is an eye-opener in this. I would like to quite the relevant portion of that editorial. It says: “Dealing with India-Pakistan prisoners - Nothing could be more repulsive in modern-day diplomacy than a country arresting civilian nationals of another country and then cynically using them as bargaining chips in bilateral issues. Yet India and Pakistan have followed this egregious practice for decades. They have kept hundreds of people from the other side in their jails, releasing them only when it suits one or both governments, irrespective of when an individual prisoner completed his sentence. Some of these hapless cross-border prisoners end up spending as long as two decades in jail for offences such as smuggling, overstaying their visa, or crossing the border illegally. Almost all of them are poor; at the time of their arrest, some are not even aware of committing an offence. Clearly, the fishermen who regularly get arrested in the Arabian Sea for crossing the international boundary line do so only for livelihood reasons. …” It is really an eye-opener. Sir, as correctly mentioned by other Members, I am of the opinion that these kinds of matters deserve very serious attention.

Now, I come to the other thing, that is, the bad plight of Indians in Sri Lanka. My learned friend was also saying about that. I myself had raised a submission in this august body during the last Session. Now, there is a development in that. The Member of Parliament, Shri Thirumavalavan from Tamil Nadu was trying to meet the fishermen and he was not allowed to meet them. The report says like that. The heading of that news item is: “India in talks with Sri Lanka to bring back the Indian prisoners languishing in jails in that country.” It says:
“External Affairs Minister S.M. Krishna has said the government is in talks with Sri Lanka to bring back the Indian prisoners languishing in jails in that country. We have been in discussions with the Sri Lankan government on the matter and continue to pursue it vigorously keeping in mind the humanitarian aspect," Krishna told Thirumavalavan, MP from Tamil Nadu. … ” He was replying to his letter.

It further says: “The foreign minister, in a written reply to him, informed: Both sides are working towards finalizing an 'Agreement on the Transfer of Sentenced Persons'. We will shortly send a delegation to Colombo to negotiate the finalized draft text," Krishna said in his letter, a copy of which is with IANS. Indian prisoners in Sri Lanka allege that officials at the Indian mission are not bothered about their plight. One of them told IANS that some had spent as many as 16 years in captivity and added that Indian authorities were making no efforts to get them released.” It is a sad plight. I am requesting the hon. Minister to take up this matter not only in a legal way but it should be dealt in a political way also. India is having
very good relation with our neighbouring countries. Whether it is Pakistan or Sri Lanka, we must make our maximum effort to get the things done.

Towards the end, I would like to say one more thing, that is, in respect of U.A.E. In a reply in Rajya Sabha, hon. Overseas Indian Affairs Minister, Shri Vayalar Ravi stated: “A total of 3095 Indians are serving jail sentences in six Gulf countries; 1361 in U.A.E, 1226 in Saudi Arabia, 263 in Kuwait, 126 in Oman, 91 in Bahrain and 28 in Qatar.”
There is a happy report in this. In January, 2011, a meeting with the Deputy Custodian of Holy Mosque, Prince Sultan Bin Abdulaziz Al Saud, approved a prisoner transfer deal with India. An Extradition Agreement and Transfer of Sentenced Persons Agreement between the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and the Republic of India were signed on 28th February, 2010, one year back. Even after one year, it has not been materialized.

What I am saying is that it is a denial of justice. On flimsy ground, innocent persons are kept in custody. I would request the Government, as pointed out by me earlier, that the matter should be taken up not only within the legal framework but
also politically, whatever may be the relations of Indian Republic with Saudi Arabia. Our Prime Minister had visited Saudi Arabia. He was given a red carpet reception. It was a historical reception Saudi Arabia had given to our hon. Prime Minister. I would request the Government that we must use our good office to get the things done. With this humble submission, I support this Bill. (End)