HUMAN COST: Activists in New Delhi carry empty coffins to protest against the AFSPA; (top) Irom Sharmila

The Jawaharlal Nehru Hospital in Imphal was the rallying point for human rights activists, politicians and citizens last week. Elsewhere in the city, exhibitions, film screenings, music concerts and seminars were held as activist Irom Sharmila’s ‘fast-unto-death’ agitation against the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act (AFSPA) entered its 10th year.

The Jawaharlal Nehru Hospital has been her ‘home’ for much of these nine years where she is under detention by the police for “attempting suicide”. Sharmila has been force-fed through a nasal drip since November, 2000.

“Her immune system has virtually collapsed and she suffers from many ailments but she will not budge until and unless the government meets her demand and repeals the AFSPA,” says Irom Singhjit Singh, Sharmila’s brother.

The AFSPA, which gives a free hand to the armed forces against insurgents in the northeast, came into force in 1958. Initially, it was only meant for Assam and Manipur, and that too for a very short period. But with the formation of other states in the northeast, and the spread of insurgency, the law was extended to all of them. Later, laws on similar lines were enacted for Punjab and Jammu and Kashmir as well.

While granting “special powers” to the armed forces, Section 4(a) of the Act authorises army personnel to use force after giving due warning “even to the causing of death”, if he is convinced that it is necessary to do so for the “maintenance of public order”.

“The Act is a virtual licence to kill,” asserts Babloo Loitongbam, an associate of Sharmila and executive director, Human Rights Alert, an Imphal-based NGO.

Ever since the law has come into effect, the armed forces have been accused of large-scale human rights violations, including illegal detentions, indiscriminate firing and extra-judicial killings.

In fact, Sharmila, a poet and an human rights activist, started her fast on November 2, 2000, soon after visiting Malom, near Imphal, where 10 people were allegedly gunned down by Assam Rifles personnel. “She saw the dead bodies of 10 innocent people. She knew that justice would not be done unless the AFSPA was withdrawn from the state and announced her decision to go on a fast unto death,” says her brother.

“The AFSPA is the alter ego of the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Ordinance promulgated by the British in 1942 against Indian freedom fighters. It’s a draconian law under which thousands have disappeared and nobody from the army has been held accountable,” says Arup Borbora, senior advocate, Guwahati High Court, and a human rights activist.

Some of the most infamous human rights abuses that have occurred while the law has been in force include the killing of 15 villagers in Oinam, Manipur, allegedly by Assam Rifles men in 1987, and the alleged rape and murder of activist Manorama Devi in 2004, also by Assam Rifles personnel.

The Act does give sweeping powers to military personnel. Section 6 of the Act says that “no prosecution, suit or other legal proceeding shall be instituted, except with the previous sanction of the Central Government, against any person in respect of anything done or purported to be done in exercise of the powers conferred by this Act”.

But the army defends this provision of the law vociferously. “The armed forces are called in when the law and order situation is beyond the control of local law enforcement authorities. It is but natural for the armed forces to expect protection from prosecution when they operate in these circumstances,” says Lt Gen. (retd) V.K. Nayar, former Governor of Manipur and Nagaland.

The Act does contain some checks on potential misuse. For instance, Section 5 stipulates that those detained by army personnel should be “made over to the officer in charge of the nearest police station with the least possible delay”. But activists allege that this is rarely followed.

They also stress that faulty implementation is not the only problem with the law. “The AFSPA has fundamental problems,” says Loitongbam. Agrees Borbora, “It is not just the government panels, even judicial findings have found the law to be seriously flawed.”

In fact, the law was challenged in the Supreme Court in 1980. But the apex court, while clubbing all the cases against the AFSPA (Naga People’s Movement of Human Rights, etc. vs Union of India), upheld the law in 1997. Even so, it did observe that “prolonged or too frequent deployment of armed forces...is likely to generate a feeling of alienation among the people against the armed forces.”

After the furore over the killing of Manorama Devi in 2004, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh set up the Justice B.P. Jeevan Reddy Committee to review the AFSPA. The Committee recommended that the controversial law should be repealed. “The Act, for whatever reason, has become a symbol of oppression, an object of hate and an instrument of discrimination and high-handedness,” it observed, and said, “AFSPA should be repealed...The Act is too sketchy, too bald and quite inadequate in several particulars”.

The Committee felt that instead of the AFSPA, the challenges posed by insurgency and terrorism could be dealt with much better by making a few changes to the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967.

“It is now up to the government to implement the report,” says Lt Gen. (retd) V.R. Raghavan, a member of the Jeevan Reddy Committee.

Other reports have also expressed the view that the time may have come to jettison the AFPSA. In its fifth report in 2007, the second Administrative Reforms Commission, headed by law minister, Veerappa Moily, observed that “the repeal of the AFPSA would remove the feeling of discrimination and alienation among the people of the northeastern states”.

So why is the AFPSA still in force? “I cannot say why the government has so far failed to repeal the law. There have been various pulls and pressures, but I hope it will do away with AFSPA sooner rather than later,” says Thokchom Meinya, Lok Sabha Member of Parliament from Manipur.

However, rather than an outright repeal, the government may be mulling amendments to the AFSPA. In fact, Union home minister P. Chidambaram recently announced that amendments to the AFSPA have been finalised and sent to the Cabinet.

But that is unlikely to satisfy activists. Warning against “half measures”, Singhjit Singh says, “We want a complete repeal of the law, nothing less, nothing more.” Agrees Loitongbam, “Amending it will not do. The very wording of the law symbolises oppression and it would be in the interest of the country to do away with the whole law.”

While the government decides what to do with the controversial AFSPA, Irom Sharmila marks time at the hospital, hoping that she will live to see the day when the law is finally repealed. “It’s been a long struggle for my sister. I hope that she comes home soon. And that is entirely in the government’s hands,” says Singhjit Singh.