top of page

AFSPA Reimposed in Manipur: Examining the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act

The Ministry of Home Affairs has reimposed the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act (AFSPA), 1958, in violence-hit areas of Manipur, including Jiribam. The move aims to restore order amidst ongoing disturbances. However, AFSPA remains one of the most debated laws in India due to its implications on human rights and governance.


What is AFSPA?

The Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act, 1958, grants extraordinary powers to the armed forces in areas designated as "disturbed." Here's a closer look at its key provisions:


Key Features

  1. Disturbed Areas:

    • Declared by the Governor, Administrator of a UT, or the Centre when armed forces’ intervention is deemed necessary to maintain order.

  2. Special Powers to Armed Forces:

    • Open fire on individuals violating the law.

    • Arrest and search premises without a warrant.

  3. Immunity to Armed Forces:

    • Legal proceedings require prior approval from the Central Government.

  4. Treatment of Arrested Persons:

    • Detainees must be handed over to the nearest police station with minimal delay.

  5. Applicability:

    • Currently in parts of Assam, Manipur, Nagaland, Arunachal Pradesh.

    • Jammu & Kashmir has its specific law, the Armed Forces (Jammu & Kashmir) Special Powers Act, 1990.


Judicial Interpretations

Several landmark cases have scrutinized AFSPA's provisions:

  1. Naga People’s Movement for Human Rights Case (1997):

    • Supreme Court upheld AFSPA but clarified that powers, especially those leading to death, must be exercised under clear circumstances.

  2. Extra Judicial Execution Victim Families Association Case (2016):

    • Court ruled that armed forces are not immune to investigations for excesses committed, even in disturbed areas.


Recommendations for Reform

Multiple committees have proposed changes to AFSPA:

  1. Justice B.P. Jeevan Reddy Committee (2004):

    • Recommended scrapping AFSPA, stating it had become a symbol of oppression.

  2. Santosh Hegde Committee (2013):

    • Suggested periodic review every six months to assess its necessity.

  3. Justice Verma Committee (2013):

    • Called for applying regular criminal law in cases of sexual violence by armed forces.


Concerns Surrounding AFSPA

While AFSPA aims to address security concerns, it has been criticized for:

  • Abuse of Power: Reports of extrajudicial killings, arbitrary detentions, and misuse of authority.

  • Human Rights Violations: Allegations include torture, sexual violence, and excessive force.

  • Lack of Accountability: Immunity provisions often hinder justice for victims.


Way Forward

  • Implement reforms based on committee recommendations to ensure better accountability and transparency.

  • Regular reviews of its necessity in specific areas to avoid prolonged imposition.

  • Foster civil-military cooperation to balance security needs with human rights considerations.



Practice Question


Consider the following statements regarding the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act (AFSPA), 1958:

  1. It allows the Governor of a state to declare an area as disturbed without consulting the Central Government.

  2. Legal proceedings against armed forces personnel under AFSPA require prior sanction from the Supreme Court.

  3. AFSPA is applicable only to North-Eastern states of India.

Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

(a) 1 only

(b) 2 and 3 only

(c) 1 and 3 only

(d) None of the above


Answer: (d) None of the above


Explanation:

  • Statement 1 is incorrect; the Governor, Administrator of a UT, or the Centre can declare an area as disturbed.

  • Statement 2 is incorrect; legal proceedings require the sanction of the Central Government, not the Supreme Court.

  • Statement 3 is incorrect; AFSPA is also applicable to Jammu & Kashmir under its specific act.


0 views0 comments

Comments


bottom of page