Freedom from AFSPA and nose feeding
- The Sangai Express Editorial :: August 20, 2014 -
Irom Sharmila produced before the CJM at Lamphel on 14 June 2013 :: Pix - Bullu Raj
The Court of Sessions Judge, Imphal East has passed a landmark judgement today, the 19th of August 2014, and it would remain an outstanding milestone in the history of mankind’s struggle against controversial laws like the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act or AFSPA which has its genesis in the British colonial era.
Irom Sharmila is one universal name which symbolizes common man’s struggle against repressive laws enacted by ruling elites even though she is known more about her crusade against the AFSPA.
For 14 long years, she has been fasting. The Sessions Court verdict says that Sharmila shows no intention of committing suicide either by way of continuous fasting or other means.
Thus first ingredient of the offence punishable under Section 309 IPC, i.e to commit suicide is lacking. The Court’s verdict reads, “The petitioner (Irom Sharmila) be released from custody, if not required in any other case”. This is a highly significant judgement fraught with many political and legal implications.
The Court which represents the country’s judiciary in the particular case, through its verdict, is directly or indirectly upholding Sharmila’s struggle as well as the mode of struggle.
The Court’s observation that Sharmila has no intention to commit suicide is without any doubt. But one question arises. Is the phrase ‘fast unto death’ not applicable or misplaced with regard to the Sharmila’s struggle? Sharmila has been fasting since 2000 with breaks of only 24 hours or so between one release order and next formal arrest.
Indeed she has been fasting for the last 14 years and yet she has no intention to commit suicide. This may sound paradoxical or ironical to casual observers. But the truth is, there is no inherent incompatibility in this observation.
The underlying message behind Sharmila’s unprecedented marathon fasting is that she is committed to battle against laws which in her view are repressive, more precisely AFSPA till the end. The Sessions Court has ordered for her release but there are many higher Courts and only time can tell how things would unfold.
Switching to Sharmila’s subject of struggle, one would say AFSPA is one factor which separates the North East region and Jammu &Kashmir from other parts of India apart from other divisive factors like topography, geographical location etc. These are natural barriers but AFSPA is an artificial one, that too a legacy of the colonial era.
No doubt, AFSPA is enforced only in areas declared ‘disturbed’. But what one finds hard to digest is New Delhi’s understanding of ‘disturbed’ area.
Whereas North East and JK have been declared ‘disturbed’ since many decades back, they could not see any disturbance in the Red Corridor where Maoists are virtually controlling swathes and swathes of territory. Very much has been talked about AFSPA and an intense debate is still going on.
Yet the Ministry of Home Affairs is in no urgency to review the infamous AFSPA. “At present there is no such proposal (for repealing AFSPA). If the situation so warrants that areas be declared as disturbed, the same is done. This is examined/assessed periodically”.
These were the exact words of Minister of State for Home Kiren Rijiju. Kiren Rijiju made this statement in the Lok Sabha on July 22 this year. It was often argued that impunity was given legal and political sanction or institutional support in Manipur with the imposition of the Armed Forces (Special) Powers Act 1958.
Apart from Sharmila, people of Manipur and Kashmir, demand for repeal of the Act emanated from all UN Treaty and Charter based bodies, Justice Jeevan Reddy Committee, Administrative Reform Commission and Ansari Report on J&K, etc.
Yet the Government of India still feels that AFSPA is essential for North East and Kashmir.
By restricting AFSPA only to these regions, the infamous Act has been imbued with sectarian and discriminatory colours as many observers commented while some others went to the extent of calling AFSPA racist.
Hopefully, the Sessions Court verdict may generate another round of debate and culminate with Irom Sharmila’s freedom, freedom from both AFSPA and nose feeding.
* Comments posted by users in this discussion thread and other parts of this site are opinions of the individuals posting them (whose user ID is displayed alongside) and not the views of e-pao.net. We strongly recommend that users exercise responsibility, sensitivity and caution over language while writing your opinions which will be seen and read by other users. Please read a complete Guideline on using comments on this website.