The AFSPA debate : Impunity and discrimination
- The Sangai Express Editorial :: July 24, 2014 -

There is virtually no difference between UPA and NDA, or BJP and Congress if the issue is the infamous Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act and the persistent demand to repeal it. "At present there is no such proposal (for repealing AFSPA). If the situation so warrants that areas be declared as disturbed, the same is done. This is examined/assessed periodically". These were the exact words of Minister of State for Home Kiren Rijiju.

Kiren Rijiju made this statement in the Lok Sabha on July 22.

The statement is very succinct in the sense that it left nothing to doubt the Government of India's will to keep alive the extraordinary legislation of colonial era.

Indeed AFSPA is extraordinary because it is one law which empowers even a non-commissioned military officer to search any place, destroy any structure, detain or shoot anyone on mere suspicion.

Again, AFSPA is extraordinary because it is enforced in only extraordinary places like Manipur and Jammu & Kashmir, not anywhere else in the country even though many states in mainland India are infested and affected with Maoist militants and their violent armed campaign.

This is one discriminatory dimension of AFSPA. Demand for repeal of the Act emanated from all UN Treaty and Charter based bodies, Justice Jeevan Reddy Committee, Administrative Reform Commission and Ansari Report on J&K, etc, not to mention about Irom Sharmila's non-violent crusade but it has never been repealed.

Yes, the Supreme Court issued certain guidelines and directives on AFSPA. Still, there were seven major military operations in the state after the guidelines were issued. Casualty to human rights in the course of these military operations was a foregone conclusion.

The very idea of turning the Northeast or Kashmir into 'alien spaces' where martial law like Armed Forces' Special Powers Act (AFSPA) operates suggests that people of the region is closer to Hannah Arendt's 'objective enemies' whose definition is created by virtue of their existence in a particular position at a historical moment in time, and that they do not fall within the self-definition of a state.

What makes AFSPA draconian, as many protesters often described it, is the impunity it guarantees to security forces.

Impunity refers to the failure to bring perpetrators of human rights violations to justice and at the same time refers to denial of justice and redressal mechanism to the victims.

In short, it is exemption from punishment or loss. Impunity is believed to be widely prevalent in autocratic regimes such as dictatorship, theocratic and military junta, etc.

India is a democratic country and the country proudly claims to be the largest democracy.

Ironically, the Government of India is steadfastly upholding the infamous AFSPA for governance of some of its selected territories which is manifestly discriminatory.

The idea of 'national security' which the Indian state emphatically nurtures may in the long run create incurable conflicts and permanently alienate the whole of North East and Kashmir psychologically, if not physically.

It is a tragedy that the Indian state cannot review or re-define the colonial concept of frontiers vis-a-vis Kashmir and the North East.