AFSPA

Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act, 1958

The Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act (AFSPA), was passed on September 11, 1958 by the Parliament of India. It conferred special powers upon armed forces in what the language of the act calls "disturbed areas" in the states of Arunachal Pradesh, Assam, Manipur,Meghalaya, Mizoram, Nagaland and Tripura. It was later extended to Jammu and Kashmir as the The Armed Forces (Jammu and Kashmir) Special Powers Act, 1990 in July 1990

According to the Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA), in an area that is proclaimed as "disturbed", an officer of the armed forces has powers to: "Fire upon or otherwise use force, even to the causing of death, against any person who is acting in contravention of any law" against "assembly of five or more persons" or possession of deadly weapons. To arrest without a warrant and with the use of "necessary" force anyone who has committed certain offenses or is suspected of having done so To enter and search any premise in order to make such arrests. It gives Army officers legal immunity for their actions. There can be no prosecution, suit or any other legal proceeding against anyone acting under that law. Nor is the government's judgment on why an area is found to be "disturbed" subject to judicial review.

It was withdrawn by the Manipur government in some of the constituencies in August 2004 in spite of the Central government not favouring withdrawal of the act. In December 2006, responding to what he said were 'legitimate' grievances of the people of Manipur, Prime Minister Manmohan Singhdeclared that the Act would be amended to ensure it was 'humane' on the basis of the Jeevan Reddy Commission's report, which is believed to have recommended the Act's repeal.

The Act has been employed in the Indian administrated state of Jammu and Kashmir since 1990 .

On 23 March 2009, UN Commissioner for Human Rights Navanethem Pillay asked India to repeal the AFSPA. She termed the law as "dated and colonial-era law that breach contemporary international human rights standards.

Violence has increased in the past two decades since enforcement of the Act. The state has created a "Gallantry Awards" pool for the arms forces which are awarded for elimination of insurgencies and conduction of operations. The term 'encounters' is used by the security forces to describe confrontations where it is deemed appropriate, under the provisions of the act, to employ violence.

When India presented its second periodic report to the United Nations Human Rights Committee in 1991, members of the UNHRC asked numerous questions about the validity of the AFSPA. They questioned the constitutionality of the AFSPA under Indian law and asked how it could be justified in light of Article 4 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, ICCPR. The Attorney General of India responded that the AFSPA is a necessary measure to prevent the secession of the North Eastern states. He said that a response to this agitation for secession in the North East had to be done on a "war footing." He argued that the Indian Constitution, in Article 355, made it the duty of the Central Government to protect the states from internal disturbance, and that there is no duty under international law to allow secession.

The act has been criticized by Human Rights Watch as a "tool of state abuse, oppression and discrimination".

The South Asian Human Rights Documentation Centre argues that the governments' call for increased force is part of the problem.

"This reasoning exemplifies the vicious cycle which has been instituted in the North East due to the AFSPA. The use of the AFSPA pushes the demand for more autonomy, giving the people of the North East more reason to want to secede from a state which enacts such powers and the agitation which ensues continues to justify the use of the AFSPA from the point of view of the Indian Government." - The South Asian Human Rights Documentation Centre

"Menghaobi" Irom Sharmila Chanu , also known as the Iron Lady of Manipur, is a civil rights activist, political activist, journalist and poet from the Indian state of Manipur. Since November 4, 2000, she's been on a political fast demanding the Government of India to withdraw the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act, 1958, also otherwise known as AFSPA, from Manipur and other areas of India's north east. Ten years since it began in 2000, Irom Sharmila Chanu's fast is unparalleled in the history of political protest.

The Jeevan Reddy Commission The big question today is, whether AFSPA is an exceptional and temporary measure or a permanent one? Thirty years seem long enough to get closer to attain permanency. In 2004, in the wake of intense agitation that was launched by several civil society groups following the death of Manoram Devi, while in the custody of the Assam Rifles and the indefinite fast undertaken by Irom Sharmila, Union Home Minister Shivraj Patil visited Manipur and reviewed the situation with the concerned state authorities. In the same year, Prime Minister, Manmohan Singh assured activists that the central government would consider their demand sympathetically. The central government accordingly set up a five-member committee under the Chairmanship of Justice B P Jeevan Reddy, former judge of the Supreme Court. The panel was given the mandate of "review[ing] the provisions of AFSPA and advis[ing] the Government of India whether (a) to amend the provisions of the Act to bring them in consonance with the obligations of the government towards protection of human rights; or (b) to replace the Act by a more humane Act." The Reddy committee submitted its recommendations on June 6, 2005. However, the government failed to take any concrete action on the recommendations even after almost a year and a half. The then Defence Minister Pranab Mukherjee had rejected the withdrawal or significant dilution of the Act on the grounds that “it is not possible for the armed forces to function” in “disturbed areas” without such powers. The 147-page report recommends, "The Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act, 1958, should be repealed." During the course of its work, the committee members met several individuals, organisations, parties, institutions and NGOs, which resulted in the report stating that "the Act, for whatever reason, has become a symbol of oppression, an object of hate and an instrument of discrimination and high handedness." The report clearly stated that "It is highly desirable and advisable to repeal the Act altogether, without of course, losing sight of the overwhelming desire of an overwhelming majority of the [North East] region that the Army should remain (though the Act should go)." But activists say the Reddy panel despite its recommendation for the 'repeal of the Act' has nothing substantial for the people. The report recommends the incorporation of AFSPA in the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967, which will be operable all over India.

Current Status Congress split over AFSPA withdrawal in JK ‎ ... to have hit a hurdle as reports of differences cropping in top Congress leaders on the withdrawal of Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA) emerge. ... AFSPA set to go from a few areas in J&K‎ - Times of India No dilution in AFSPA for Jammu & Kashmir‎ - Economic Times Army chief meets Prime Minister Manmohan Singh on dilution of ...‎ - Daily News & Analysis