Indian Defence Review

Irom Sharmila became a political icon almost at power with Suu Kyi, Martin Lither King or a Nelson Mandela. But the difference is that she has chosen to build upon her political iconisation and has desired to become the Chief Minister of the State. Whereas other legends did not change the course of struggle in between and continued till they won or died. Here Iron Sharmila has not won nor she died. She is rather looking for a course corrections.

Irom Sharmila ended her fast after 16 years on Tuesday on August 9, 2016 and came out of nasogastric intubation, long seen as a symbol of Manipuri resistance against Armed Forces Special Power Act (AFSPA), 1958. She had commenced her fast at the age of 28 in protest against the killing of 10 people at a bus stop at Malom, Manipur on Nov 2, 2000 by Assam Rifles following an attack on its convoy. Irom Sharmila was described as a the world’s longest hunger striker and lauded as a ‘prisoner of conscience’ by Amnesty International. She was in the league of Suu kyi of Myanmar fighting for democratic rights of Myanmar citizens.

It is a truth that in a democratic country like India, the use of Acts like AFSPA is extremely unfortunate and rather a blot on an otherwise decent Indian human rights records. Historically, first time in British Raj, an Armed Forces Special Power Ordinance was brought in August 1942 primarily to suppress to Quit India movement launched by Mahatma Gandhi. The present AFSPA is even worse than the above Ordinance.

The British Ordinance had the provision of a Captain or equivalent as the Competent Authority to Act under the Ordinance. The present AFSPA has the Competent Authority of the rank of Havaldar or equivalent. More so over, the present AFSPA 1958 has given the authority to the armed forces to enter any house without warrant, search the house or even break it, something that was not there in the British Ordinance.

Section 46 of CrPC empowers the police to use appropriate force to take somebody under custody. However, Sub Section 46(3) insures that in the process of affecting the arrest, such person should not die if he does not happen to be accused of a crime inviting capital punishment. Contrary to this Section 4(a) of AFSPA , 1958 allows the armed forces to resort to fire in order to maintain public order even if it leads to any mortal casualty. Also as per the Article 22 of the Constitution of India, an arrested person has to be produced before Court within 24 hours but under Section 5 of AFSPA, the armed forces will produce the arrested person to the nearest police station with ‘least possible delay’. There is no definition as to what is meant by ‘least possible delay’. There are sufficient numbers of loopholes which provide unbridled powers with armed forces.

The irony is that the armed forces are immune from prosecution, suit or any other legal proceeding while Acting under AFSPA and the Government decision to declare any area as ‘disturbed’ is not a subject to any judicial review. There are abandoned numbers of instances in which the human right organizations have vehemently opposed the use of this Act. But, Hon’ble Supreme Court of India has upheld the Constitutionality of AFSPA in Naga Peoples Movement Vs Union of India (1997) and issued certain guidelines for the operation of this Act.

Mainly, AFSPA draws its strength from Article 355 of the Constitution of India vide which it is the responsibility of the Union to protect every State against internal disturbance and to insure that the Government of the every State is carried on in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution. Now if the Union has its responsibility, it needs authority. As a result AFSPA 1958 was amended in 1972 and the Central Government got the power to declare any State or Union Territory or part of it as ‘disturbed’. Earlier the power to declare any area as ‘disturbed’ was vested with the State Governments.

The entire gamut of AFSPA is intertwined with the complexities the maintaining of public order and insuring the Constitutionality of the governance of a State. Notwithstanding the predominant role of the Central Government into the imposition of AFSPA in a State, the actual key of its continuance and longevity stays with the States. In other words, it is primarily for the State to govern in such a way that a situation warranting AFSPA does not arise. Even due to some reasons beyond the control of the State, the AFSPA is brought in, there is always a window of opportunity for the State to wriggle out of this Act.

There are two good examples to refer to. In Punjab, AFSPA was brought in the year 1983. The State remained under turmoil of militancy for almost a decade. However, the Government and the civil society of Punjab battled it out democratically and peace and order was restored in the State. Eventually in 1997, AFSPA was withdrawn from Punjab and till today the State had not experienced any development on the ground that can lead to the reintroduction of AFSPA .The credit of removal of AFSPA from Punjab goes to the people and successive Governments of that State. Similarly in the year 1997, AFSPA was enforced in 40 police stations of Tripura which was finally withdrawn in May 2015 from that State. This happened because of the honest and dedicated Government of Shri Manik Sarkar of Tripura who is undoubtedly one of the most honest politicians this country has ever seen.

In Tripura, the militancy lost to a clean and honest Government , able to restore the faith in the democratic values in the people and institutions which together defeated militancy in Tripura. Theoretically, it is possible that an honest and pro-people Government can insure peace and prosperity in a State where the possibility of any Central intervention or AFSPA could never arise. It is for the people to decide the type of laws they would like to be governed with.

The task is clearly cutout for Irom Sharmila if she wants the AFSPA to be withdrawn from Manipur. There are 18 militant outfits in Manipur who have been fighting against the sovereignty of the Indian State. Irom Sharmila has been fighting a proxy war against the Indian State for these militant outfits in a non violent mode. She has been an icon in the fight against AFSPA in the State of Manipur. She gave her 16 years of her youth fighting for those people of Manipur who do not appear to be pleased with her decision to end her fast. Her mother is not too happy about her decision of ending fast and the local ISKCON temple turned her down when she sought to stay there. In fact some of the militant outfits have already started branding her as a traitor who apparently abandoned a great cause of Manipur for the sake of getting back to her own life.

Two banned insurgent groups, KYKL and KCP, have threatened to kill Sharmila if she gets married or contests elections. Irom Sharmila wants to join politics and would like to try a different method of struggle against AFSPA in Manipur. This is a welcome news and very heartening to see a paradigm shift in her attitude towards electoral politics in India. Earlier she used to consider election and politician as farce. Now she wants to be a part of the same electoral process.

Irom Sharmila became a political icon almost at power with Suu Kyi, Martin Lither King or a Nelson Mandela. But the difference is that she has chosen to build upon her political iconisation and has desired to become the Chief Minister of the State. Whereas other legends did not change the course of struggle in between and continued till they won or died. Here Iron Sharmila has not won nor she died. She is rather looking for a course corrections.

“I want to eat good food, get married, want to have children. Please don’t put me on a pedestal. I am just an ordinary person engaged in an extraordinary struggle.” She said. This is going to be very tough as in India we glorify personal sacrifices even if it is misplaced and would employ all forces to persuade the person to continue with the scarifies no matter how absurd it may be.

Irom Sharmila is not a politician and there are serious doubts that the militant outfits of Manipur would anyway rally behind her in joining the electoral process the way they did while she was on fast. She would need a great deal of support from all democratic forces within and outside Manipur to succeed in her mission. It is important for the nation that she succeeds. This would set a good precedence and create an option for every oppressed and misguided people or group to join the political mainstream and fight against any real or deemed injustice.