IMMORTALISING AFSPA

Czadanda Saint *

A Sept 2011 Peace Rally at Imphal marking protest against the signing of AFSPA in 1958 :: Pix - Amarjit Longjam

"The debates and the arguments over the AFSPA has been waylaid in the recent times. The first and the foremost question should be of justice or fairness; not of racism, discrimination, neglect, indifference and blah blah ..."

Of course, we no longer live in the times of Che Guevera. Now, we can't expect somebody to just pick up our gun when we fall and continue shooting. For good measure, we have moved from the era of 'black and white' photographs and motion pictures. Life has become much more complicated, and much more inter-connected at the same time. And socio-politically, growing up with concepts like 'for the greater good', 'necessary evil' and 'collateral damage', our perception of life and the world around us has undergone a drastic change. Now, we live in a world where perception itself is everything. Where 'reason' and 'logic' based on necessity have gained more prominence or rather is much more valued than 'what is right' or 'what is good'. Now, we live in a world where it is applaudable to even criticize the life and the works of someone of the stature of Mother Teresa; if it appears logical or reasonable enough (read Christopher Hitchens' The Missionary Position - Mother Teresa in Theory and Practice). And closer home, we live in the times of AFSPA. And the world I grew up in- well, along the dusty roads of Imphal, a few kilometers away from where one Irom Chanu Sharmila lives imprisoned; more as a prisoner of conscience and less as a prisoner of State.

Before delving into anything, let me take a trip down the history, to one fateful day of 18th August 1958, a month before the Armed Forces Special Powers Bill became the Armed Forces Special Powers Act. On that day, in the debate session of the Lok Sabha, the respected Speaker of the Lok Sabha asked a question to the then Home Minister G. B. Pant. The question is reproduced as follows:
"Does the Hon'ble Minister feel that this is the procedure, he can shoot if it is a disturbed area, that is the procedure established by law? He can shoot. Anyone can be killed or shot at, but is this the procedure established by law, does it go to that extent? Article 21 says that no person can be deprived of his life. Here any person can be deprived of his life by any Commissioned Officer, he can shoot."

In reply, the Hon'ble Minister beat around the bush and went into the technicalities of the proposed Bill. There was no straight answer. Instead, he went on to justify the Bill; as a legislation required by the exigencies of time and circumstances. His reply is not worth discussing anymore, as whatever the arguments may have been, a month later, the Bill was passed and AFSPA came into existence. However, from here, it is quite evident that to the then Home Minister, AFSPA was a 'necessary evil', designed 'for the greater good of all'. And he knew that there were going to be 'collateral damages'. And now, more than 50 years since that fateful day, we are still in the search for that 'greater good of all'.

Broadly speaking, there are three points which are usually raised by the Human Rights' activists, which ought to be kept in mind while discussing AFSPA. They are, viz.
(i) Accountability of the Armed Forces under the Act.
(ii) Presumption of innocence.
(iii) Proclamation of 'disturbed area'.

As for the first point, it is alleged that there is no accountability whatsoever of the Armed Forces in the pursuance of their activities (duties) under the Act. For previous sanction of the Central Government is required, if we are to question any of their purported acts (legal or allegedly illegal) in any Court of law. AFSPA guarantees virtual immunity to the Armed Forces as regards the 'disturbed areas' they are engaged in. Kind of like a James Bond with a license to kill, sans the charm and the sophistication.

Secondly, the universal principle of 'innocent until proven guilty' is not respected. Everyone is viewed with suspicion, as a potential extremist, a threat to the national security. The Armed Forces have got unbridled powers to question, detain anyone; enter any house, seize and destroy any property, conduct 'combing' and 'sweeping' operations in any disturbed area, for any threat, real or imaginary, however miniscule or preposterous it may be.

And lastly and most importantly, the proclamation of the 'disturbed area' status. Because, it is only in the 'disturbed areas', the AFSPA will be operative, where the Armed Forces will have their special powers. The activists against AFSPA argue that as the proclamation of 'disturbed area' by the Government is not subject to judicial review, it is very susceptible to arbitrariness and unfairness.

Much more qualified and better individuals have already discussed these issues to the very core, and there is not much point in singing the same song with a different tune. But it goes without saying that whatever contentions may have been put up against AFSPA, the Supreme Court in a landmark judgment in 1997 upheld the validity of AFSPA and the arguments that it was unconstitutional and that it was a colourable legislation were all quashed. The Apex Court was of the view that the 'deemed' unbridled powers of the Armed Forces under AFSPA were not as arbitrary or unchecked as it appears to be as adequate safeguards and stringent guidelines were laid down in the Army's Code of Conduct ( The Dos and Don'ts). But consider this extract from the official statement of the Assam Rifles, re-iterated in the Court of law, regarding the death of Thangjam Manorama Devi after she was apprehended form her home (reproduced in verbatim):

"... On their way to Yairipok, the deceased (Manorama) requested to allow her to respond to the call of nature. The vehicle was stopped and the patrol party took position at a distance of 30-35 meters away from her. By then, it was 5.30 a.m. All of a sudden, the deceased started to flee through the nearby hedge. The guard commander commanded her to stop and fired a shot in the air as a warning. The other members of the guard fired towards her legs. In consequence, she sustained bullet injuries and died."

Maybe, Manipuris are that good at sports and athletics as they say. Even our girls can out sprint a bunch of testosterone filled men in their prime, anytime, anywhere. Whoever wrote or authorized or approved the writing of that official statement is a Class A pervert, no doubt. For, according to me, this report reveals one basic intrinsic quality of him- his taste in movies. I suggest him to broaden his horizons passed the cheap B-grade Bollywood flicks, and for once in his life go to a proper movie theatre instead of those shady by-lane video parlors. Maybe then, he will get a general idea of how to write a script which appears believable, among other things!

Well, that's that. Coming back to the point, the fact remains that whatever the arguments, activism, and reports of the Inquiry Commissions to the contrary, AFSPA is still a law today. AFSPA is valid. AFSPA have stood the test of time!

It is to be underlined again and again that AFSPA is a necessary evil. It is a special legislation to be operative in a particular area to maintain law and order. But what then is the 'maintenance of law and order' if it comes at the expense of justice or fairness? Doesn't it defeat its own purpose?

AFSPA is supposedly designed to promote the 'greater good of all'. But what exactly is this 'for the greater good of all'. Frankly, I am quite disillusioned by this concept 'for the greater good of all'. Because in our contemporary times, this concept has been used to justify genocide, torture of innocents, war or aggression in the name of terror. And furthermore, it tends to make the word 'justice' sound like some commodity, its value dependent on the utility of it according to the situation. And paraphrasing what J. K. Rowling had put it so beautifully in one of her Harry Potter books – the concept of 'for the greater good of all' is just a step away from stating that 'might is right'. And the lines have definitely become blurred in our present times.

Following this line of thought, it can be mentioned here that there is one particular dimension a propos this continuing discussion of AFSPA, which is receiving minimum attention- the perception of AFSPA.

To the people of J and K and majority of the NE states, AFSPA will always be draconian. If you happen to grow up in the shadows of AFSPA, amidst the horrifying tales and grim reality, with the atmosphere always littered with fear, suspicion and mistrust almost all the time, it is not hard to imagine how your growing up years will be. And if generation after generation is subject to this same ordeal, it is quite understandable why there will always be bad blood and hatred against AFSPA. Of course, nobody is immortal. We are all going to die; one day or the other. It is not the death but the creation of the fear psychosis which is the real issue here.

But to the majority of the rest of India's population, there is the erroneous belief that laws like AFSPA is the reason that they are able to sleep soundly in their beds at night. In their minds, there is always the apprehension of the impending Chinese or Pakistani invasion. So the Armed Forces in the border areas, upholding and protecting the frontiers of our country and acting as the first line of defense, do need special laws and protection. To them, the Armed forces deserve it. Simple as that. And the people of NE or J and K don't fit in anywhere in their equation- in their understanding of AFSPA. Here also, it is about fear, though in a much different sense. And when their fears are so real, it is very hard to reach out to them.

Two conflicting, divergent perceptions regarding AFSPA; with seemingly no common grounds for consensus, no point of intersection. Or is there any? Agreed, there are movements in the NE, to secede from the Indian Territory. And some of these movements are funded/ trained by the Chinese and Burmese. Agreed, both the Army and the insurgents have suffered heavy casualties over the years. Thousands of lives have already been lost in the clash of ideologies, one in the name of protecting the national integrity and the other in the name of the right of self-determination. But in the meantime, scores of civilians have also died in the crossfire, misfire and deliberate fire. Will there be no justice for them? What does justice mean to them?

Agreed, the Armed Forces are leaving behind the comfort of their homes, to protect the sovereignty and the integrity of India, in harsh terrains and hostile situations, in sun and in rain, day in day out.

Agreed, the Armed Forces need some legal protection, some immunity for the smooth conduct of their sworn duty of protecting India's sovereignty.
Agreed, laws like AFSPA, however draconian and inhumane it may appear to be, serves this above mentioned purpose and this is the ugly truth.
Agreed, the dead innocent civilians are collateral damages, however unfortunate it may be and we have to accept this harsh reality.
Agreed. Agreed. Agreed.
But what then becomes of We, The People?
... Pigs raised for slaughter!!!