Full list of individuals designated as ‘terrorist’ under the UAPA

The HinduIndipendenteCentro15 h fa

The Indian Union Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) has designated several individuals as 'terrorists' under the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA). On January 1, 2024, Canadian-based Satwinder Singh alias Goldy Brar was labeled a terrorist for allegedly orchestrating the 2022 killing of singer Shubhdeep Singh Sidhu. Brar is linked to the Babbar Khalsa International (BKI), a designated terrorist organization. On March 7, 2024, Mohammad Qasim Gujjar, based in Pakistan-administered Kashmir and affiliated with Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT), was also designated a terrorist. Home Minister Amit Shah condemned Gujjar's involvement in terror attacks. Additional designations include former JeM commander Ashiq Ahmed Nengroo, Al-Umar Mujahideen founder Mushtaq Ahmed Zargar, and others linked to past attacks like the 2016 Pathankot airbase assault and the 2019 Pulwama attack. The UAPA, amended in 2019, now allows individual designation as terrorists under Section 35.

Lettura del bias (Centro): The article presents factual information about the designation of individuals as terrorists under the UAPA without overtly favoring any political ideology. It provides a balanced overview of the legal framework and recent designations without editorializing or emphasizing specific political agendas.

The PrintIndipendenteCentro17 h fa

The Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) has designated 23 individuals residing in Pakistan as 'terrorists' under Section 19 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA). This designation is part of India’s broader efforts to combat terrorism and maintain national security. The individuals are accused of engaging in activities that threaten India’s sovereignty and territorial integrity. The move comes amid heightened tensions between India and Pakistan over cross-border terrorism. The decision was made based on intelligence assessments and evidence provided by Indian authorities.

Lettura del bias (Centro): The article presents the MHA's action as a legal and security-based measure without overtly endorsing or criticizing the decision. It provides factual information about the designation under UAPA but does not frame the issue through a specific ideological lens. The tone remains neutral, focusing on