The Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA) was introduced by the Indian Parliament in 1958, as a response to what the Naga people perceived it to be their struggle for freedom. Since then, the AFSPA, has at various times, been used as a standard response to thwart or arrest peoples’ movements. This antiquated act continues to give the Indian armed forces the power to “shoot and kill” on mere suspicion to “maintain law and order,” and provides impunity from any legal proceeding for acts legally perpetrated under this Act. Over the years the AFSPA has become synonymous with human rights violations and has proven to be counter-productive in addressing issues of justice and basic human needs. When introduced in 1958, the purpose of the Act was to curb Naga ‘hostiles,’ but since then it has only led to more ‘hostilities’ in the sub-continent, thereby, further complicating an already difficult and complex State-People relationship.
Ironically the AFSPA is based on the Armed Forces Special Powers Ordinance of 1942, which was used by the British in their response to the ‘Quit India’ movement. In the same way that the 1942 Ordinance failed to quell the people’s desire for freedom, the 1958 AFSPA has in its 55 years of history not been able to solve any conflict using peaceful means. The AFSPA has not only failed in its objective to curb “hostility,” but has also undermined the democratic character of the Indian State, further demonstrating her belief in the use of force to protect her territorial integrity. This approach has been an effective tool used to create an atmosphere of distrust, thereby, deepening the sense of alienation and isolation between people and the government. Marcus Franke quotes Roy Burman’s opinion that martial law has failed to combat insurgency and should be repealed, but says the Indian State refuses to do so due to their “ignorance, arrogance and the willingness to act irresponsibly out of political expediency.”
The experiences of living under the AFSPA reveals disrespects for human life, lacks critical imagination and functions on the assumption that the hammer is the only means available to address disagreements. Sadly, when the only tool is the hammer, everything else becomes the nail. The absence of political will to repeal the AFSPA is a strong indicator that policy makers view the AFSPA as the only tool in responding to situations of conflict in the sub-continent. While Mahatma Gandhi’s non-violent struggle was at the heart of the Indian struggle for independence against colonial forces, his untimely death didn’t allow for this approach to be applied throughout the sub-continent, and, thereby, failed to address the issues of emancipation for all peoples. The AFSPA’s introduction and implementation nearly six decades ago by a ‘free’ India is one clear example supporting the argument that “even anti-colonial struggles may produce structures of power that reproduce the inhumanity of the states they repudiate.”
When engaging in a sustained public campaign to repeal the AFSPA, it would be prudent for Indian policy makers to carefully re-examine and reconsider their position in order to successfully repeal the act. While this would certainly enhance India’s position as a democratic country, it would also provide an opportunity to seek creative ways of addressing and transforming conflict. In order to nurture the growth of India’s democratic values and principles, it is imperative that the AFSPA is removed as the primary tool for addressing peoples’ aspirations.
