Do we have strict enough laws to restrict terror activities in the country? Is the Indian government reluctant to take tough stand against the sleeper cells and the organizations based in the country feeding such cells? Why the UPA government is showing its unwillingness to execute the sentence upheld by the Supreme Court of India against Afzal Guru in the connection with foiled terror attack on Parliament in 2001.

Is politics above than national security for the political parties? These are several questions and the people of India are still waiting for the answers. Hours within the terrorist attack on CRPF base in Rampur, the political parties started blaming each other for the failing to restrict the attack.

The central intelligence officials have said that they had issued warning to the state officials of possible attack on CRPF camps. On the other hand, Uttar Pradesh chief minister Mayawati blamed officials of the CRPF for not taking the warning seriously. The Tuesday attack on CRPF camp in Rampur is a clear show of lack of coordination between the central and state intelligence agencies and the union government and the state government as well.

Earlier, after the terror attacks in Andhra Pradesh, the Home Ministry had said that the central intelligence had issued the warning regarding the possible attack in the state.

The Fight against terrorism is primarily a state subject and the intelligence infrastructure of state governments is not strong enough to restrict such incidents despite having prior information. The crippling lack of information sharing, databases, tough legal framework, trained police force make states weak in the fight against terrorism.

According to the report, the amended version of a 1967 law - the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act - is the main counter-terrorism act India has at present. Battle against terrorism is state subject and states need central forces, financial aid and other expert guidance from the Centre before and after any terrorist attack.

After abolishing anti-terror laws such as TADA and POTA, the central government has continuously refused number of suggestions to prepare a new legislation against because it would give the federal government powers to dictate the state governments on such issues. The idea of setting up a national body to restrict terrorism - like the US Department of Homeland Security ‘ has been turned down because of concerns showed by influential regional parties.

India is currently engaged with two wars at present ‘ fight against terrorism and fight against naxalism. Prime Minister Manmohan Singh has even called Naxalism as the biggest threat to national security. Our police force look incapable to give a tough fight to teroorists armed with ultra modern techniques. Our police stations have no electricity, telephones, police vehicles and new weapons, how can they put forward a challenge to the terrorists?

The report says that states rarely store databases and share informations. The infrastructure is not in condition to control the sleeper cells across the country. When the cases related to terror attacks or foiled terror attacks terror cases go to courts, it takes much time to start and end the trials. India, which has 10.5 judges per million citizens, has fewer Judges specializing in terrorism cases.

The rising speculations about the financial terrorism are now a new threat to the government of India. At one hand the country has no tough laws to continue the fight against terrorism and on the other hand, the terrorist organizations are applying new and modern techniques to pose bigger threats to the administration. What is the need of time? We should think and take necessary steps in this direction.