The Jammu and Kashmir Public Safety Act, 1978 (PSA) is a preventive detention law under which a person is taken into custody to prevent them from acting harmfully against "the security of the state or the maintenance of the public order" in the Indian state of Jammu and Kashmir (now a union territory).

Whereas PSA applies only to Jammu and Kashmir, it is very similar to the National Security Act that is used by the central and other state governments of India for preventive detention.

[6] In February 2020, a petition was filed in the Supreme Court of India by Bhim Singh of the Jammu and Kashmir National Panthers Party terming PSA "as dead and ultra vires".

[15] The five chapters cover: CHAPTER I PreliminaryCHAPTER II Access to certain premises and areasCHAPTER III Maintenance of communal and regional harmonyCHAPTER IV Power to make orders detaining certain personsCHAPTER V MiscellaneousChapter II of the act allows the state to limit access to certain places, designating them as "prohibited places" and "protected areas".

[12] Chapter IV of the act details "detention of certain persons" including those who qualify as a foreigner or "a person residing in the area of the State under the occupation of Pakistan" to prevent them "from acting in any manner prejudicial to... the security of the state or the maintenance of public order" or those involved in smuggling or abetting the smuggling of timber or liquor.

[12] Notably there is a provision, Grounds of detention severable, (10.A.a) that goes on to state that the:[15] order shall not be deemed to be invalid or inoperative merely because one or some of the grounds is or are–– (a) vague, (ii) non-existent, (iii) not relevant, (iv) not connected or not proximately connected with such person, or (v) invalid for any other reasons whatsoever...In the act the meaning of timber is elaborated: "'Timber' means timber of Fir, Kail, Chir or Deodar tree whether in logs or cut up in pieces but does not include firewood".

[21] The report gives an example of the grounds on which the PSA was applied on a person in 1987:[21] Besides being a member of JEI (Jamaat-e-Islami) an organisation which is anti-national in character, [you] have always been challenging the accession of the State with the Union of India... You and your party men propagate and advocate among the people of the State that they have yet to decide their future which can only be done through plebiscite...During PSA detention, the detainee can be lodged in any suitable prison or subsidiary jail (such as a house) in India without a warrant, trial, or court hearing for a maximum of one or two years.

[31][32] The dossier reads:[31] The subject advocates the idea of soft separatism through his articles, tweets and social media posts, which on several occasions have attracted response, amounting to a potential threat to public order.In February 2020, a petition was filed in the Supreme Court of India by Bhim Singh of Jammu and Kashmir National Panthers Party terming PSA "as dead and ultra vires.

[40] Under international human rights law, restrictions on liberty must obey the principle of legality: they must be adequately accessible and precise so that people can regulate their conduct according to it.

The operative provisions of the act are too broad and vague that they end up granting the authorities sweeping powers, at the same time seriously diminishing any real possibility for persons detained to contest the legality of the detention order.

[43] Under Article 9(4) of the ICCPR, every person deprived of their liberty, whether arrested or detained has a right to a judicial review,[43] however, PSA makes no such provisions and instead an advisory board, a non-judicial body appointed by the government on the recommendations of a three-person committee comprising senior state bureaucrats reviews all the orders.

[38] The data regarding the number of humans detained under PSA throughout the years has been quite inconsistent, with figures widely conflicting with each other.

[46] An order of administrative detention under the PSA can be passed by the District Magistrates and Divisional Commissioners, thus making it a purely executive exercise of power.

[48] Every year the detaining authorities have been issuing detention orders without any SOPs to guide them except the reports and dossiers prepared by the J&K Police.

Prior to the Jammu & Kashmir (Preventive Detention Laws) Ordinance 2018,[50] the members of the advisory board were appointed by the Government in consultation with the Chief Justice of the High Court.

[50] Now the members – provided they were not sitting judges – would be appointed by the government on the recommendations of a 3-person committee made up of senior state bureaucrats.

[51] The RTI also revealed that the advisory board spent more than 75% of its total expenditure in 2016–17 to uphold detention orders which were quashed later on by the court.

[51] It was observed by Amnesty International was informed that in many cases, detainees refuse to file representations before the advisory board, as they see no hope of a proper hearing.

[12] Indian lawyer and constitutional expert A. G. Noorani said PSA is "patently, manifestly and demonstrably unconstitutional", adding that it is a way of bypassing "civilized jurisprudence" and "a devious way to imprison political opponents".

[52] Mohmad Aabid Bhat writes in Insight Turkey that the excuse of "public order" and "security" is being used to justify inhumane laws such as PSA.

[53] A report by Observer Research Foundation titled "Life in Kashmir after Article 370" dated 28 January 2020 recommended the immediate repeal of the PSA.