In a swift move, India's parliament has passed three new criminal law bills that aim to replace colonial-era laws, triggering a wave of controversy and criticism from rights campaigners. The bills, which have been described as the most significant overhaul of the country's criminal justice system since the British rule, were passed with minimal debate and amid the absence of over 40 opposition MPs who had been suspended for an unrelated protest.

The new laws, introduced by Home Affairs Minister Amit Shah, seek to eliminate archaic references to the British monarchy and other symbols of colonial rule. However, critics argue that these reforms give authorities alarming levels of power, raising concerns about potential abuses.

One significant provision of the bills is the extension of the detention period in police custody from the current 15-day limit to up to 90 days. While supporters argue that this change is necessary to combat terror, corruption, and organized crime, human rights activists and legal experts argue that it opens the door to increased police torture and abuse.

Moreover, the bills have also decriminalized homosexuality and adultery, marking a significant turning point in India's social and legal landscape. However, the act of obtaining sex by promising marriage to a woman will now be treated as a crime, carrying a 10-year sentence. Additionally, the new laws include a specific definition of consent.

Critics argue that the new legislation falls short of being transformative and fails to address the issue of over-criminalization. Instead, they contend that it empowers the state and law enforcement agencies disproportionately. Human rights lawyer Colin Gonsalves asserts that the new laws enacted by the government are ten times more draconian than those implemented during the British era.

One of the concerning aspects highlighted by experts is the omission of provisions for legal aid from the point of arrest. Previously, legal aid was provided from arrest, ensuring fair representation for individuals. However, the absence of this provision in the new bills is seen as a significant concern, potentially undermining the rights of the accused.

Legal experts like Shahrukh Alam emphasize that these bills grant extensive power to investigating agencies without adequate safeguards, thereby reinforcing the imbalanced authority of the police and prosecution. Furthermore, commentators like political scientist Pratap Bhanu Mehta argue that instead of decolonization, these laws seem to grant more arbitrary power to the state, raising questions about constitutional reforms and transparency in the legislative process.

Former director of the National Judicial Academy, G. Mohan Gopal, joins the chorus of criticism, stating that the bills lack measures to enhance police accountability and could potentially lead to enhanced repression. Gopal also highlights the rushed nature of the bills, suggesting that they were pushed through parliament without meaningful debate.

The passage of these laws represents the latest effort by Prime Minister Narendra Modi's government to remove remnants of colonial rule from Indian political institutions. It is expected that once President Draupadi Murmu gives her assent, the bills will become law, despite the controversy and criticism surrounding them.

As India grapples with these significant changes to its criminal justice system, concerns persist about the balance of power between the state and individual rights, emphasizing the need for robust safeguards and ongoing scrutiny of the implementation of these laws.