GS3 2019 Q19 15 marks 250 words Internal Security (Laws)

UPSC Mains 2019 GS3 Q19 — Internal Security (Laws)

Indian Government has recently strengthened the anti-terrorism laws by amending the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), 1967 and the NIA Act. Analyze the changes in the context of prevailing security environment while discussing the scope and reasons for opposing the UAPA by human rights organizations. (Answer in 250 words)

Question Decoded — examiner's intent

Directive verbs
Analyzediscussing
Scope keywords
strengthened the anti-terrorism lawsamending the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), 1967NIA Actprevailing security environmentopposing the UAPA by human rights organizations
Implicit sub-parts
  • Specific technical changes introduced by the 2019 amendments (e.g., individual designation, attachment of property).
  • Correlation between cross-border terrorism/radicalization and the need for these specific legal 'teeth'.
  • The trade-off between national security and fundamental rights (Articles 14, 19, 21).
  • Federalism concerns regarding the NIA's expanded jurisdiction without state consent.
Common pitfalls
  • Focusing only on UAPA and completely ignoring the changes to the NIA Act.
  • Listing amendments as a dry list without linking them to the 'prevailing security environment' (like lone-wolf attacks or cyber-terrorism).
  • Taking a one-sided stance; either being overly critical of the state or ignoring legitimate civil liberty concerns.
  • Failing to mention the 'designation of individuals as terrorists' which is the most contentious part of the amendment.
Dimensions required
Legal/ConstitutionalInternal SecurityHuman Rights/EthicalFederal/AdministrativeInternational (Global terror protocols)
Marks allocation hint

Allocate 50-60 words to the specific amendments of UAPA and NIA Act. Dedicate 70-80 words to justifying these changes against modern threats like radicalization. Spend 80-90 words on a balanced discussion of human rights concerns and the 'guilty until proven innocent' critique, concluding with the need for judicial oversight.

Unlock the full analysis for this question

You've seen the question and its examiner-intent decoding. Subscribers also get:

  • 🔗 Similar Previous Year Questions — cross-year, cross-paper matches so you study the topic, not the question
  • 📚 Source Map — verified citations from Laxmikanth, NCERT, PRS, Yojana, Economic Survey, Spectrum
  • 🌱 How this topic is evolving — current-affairs bridge anchored to live TARS news clustering
  • 🧭 Examiner's Pattern — how the topic has been framed across every year UPSC has tested it
  • ✍️ Answer Skeleton — a structured outline (intro → body → conclusion) you can flesh out
  • 🎯 AI evaluation — write your answer, get rubric-based scoring from gs-eval

Or browse 132+ free preview questions across all years and papers — the first 3 questions of every paper are unlocked.

Ready to practice?

Subscribers can attempt this question in 250 words and get an instant, rubric-based evaluation showing where they stand.

Subscribe to evaluate your answer →