"Man is not for law but law is made for men"
- Part 1 -

By Seram Rojesh *

The writer of the article, "Terror, Terror, Terror"(25, September, opinion, e-pao), by Mr. Geoffery is trying to picture the Indian state as a largest democratic state in the world despite AFSPA- 1958 has been very key part of the Indian Law.

The author is in the opinion that India is not passing any terror law or bill because of the democratic nature of Indian state even in many other liberal countries already passed anti terror law like "patriot act in US and 'counter terrorism bill' in UK passed after 9/11.

As a reader, I found many conceptual errors, in this article, in which I am addressing to every "idea of errors" of the statements. It is not directly addressing to the person rather trying to critic the ideas underlining with the statements of the article, "Terror, Terror, and Terror".

One important thing to discuss would be whatever the author is saying is not only the opinion of the writer itself but also representing the section of the people who have been supporting and justifying the very "Indian Terror act" both from Manipur and other people of India particularly State machinery.

We need to have a healthy debate and criticism from two sides who are opposing the act in the principle of democracy and retaining civilize societies and who are justifying this act on the basis of so called "present situation" in Manipur.

If we do not cross-check the ideas between the readers, it will not be possible to bring a progressive discourse on any issues. In the sprit of this approach, I am addressing every single "idea of errors" made by the writer of the article "TTT" and every person who thinks and believes as it is on the issue of AFSPA and conflict in Manipur.

As a reader, I found that the author has a lack of clarity about the conflict between the Indian state forces and non-state forces of Manipur. Many of the articles, the author has been writing related on the "effect on insurgency in Manipur" seems too hungry for peace and progress in our Manipur society. One good thing which we all readers need to appreciate about geoffery would be the courage to speak what he feels and understand in present situation in Manipur.

To begin my argument on the article, 'TTT', it says, "India has been having a liberal dose of terror attacks since the beginning of 21st century. Parliament attack in 2001 has been followed by number of attacks at other places to bleed the nation through many wounds. Most of the big cities like Bombay, Hyderabad, Bangalore & Delhi along with smaller places of importance like Panipat (in Haryana) and Jaipur in Rajasthan etc. have been targeted".

In this statement, one could ask to declare disturbed area under AFSPA where there has been targeted in these cities by the terrorist if AFSPA was meant to deal this problems. Will Government of India impose AFSPA in these big cities of India? The answer is No. No and No. because AFSPA is not meant to deal with the so called 'Terrorist'.

One could ask a question, Why AFSPA is not imposed in the naxalite affected areas which is, even described as the "single threat" in India by her Prime Minister. Why AFSPA is only made for North East and Kashmir? I have already written an article about the AFSPA, saying that it was an out come of the racial prejudice of the Indian State.

I am not confused why AFSPA was made and it has been existing in the last 50 years but not like POTA, which was repeal by Indian State even though POTA was much better than AFSPA in terms of the impunity of the act. (POTA does not allow shooting on suspicion). If AFSPA was made for all over India , it could have been thrown from the constitution of India by the people of India even within a six months of AFSPA. It shows Militaristic, racial and oppressive state character of the Indian state.

"Anti terror laws enacted by the affected states are awaiting approval by the centre. In a democratic country like ours the citizens are more concerned about their own rights than duties. That is the reason that anti-terror laws are not being enacted. Similar is the case with imposition of far-reaching Armed Forces Special Powers act (AFSPA) in North East (NE) region of this country."

My question in this statement would be what is the understanding of Democracy? In my understanding, India can't be a democratic country with the law like AFSPA as a way of governance. Democracy does not mean holding election regularly. There is no doubt that Indian state has been the largest election machinery in the world.

The author says, "There had been number of outcries to repeal this sweeping legislation in favor of human rights. In a liberal democratic setup like ours personal liberties and personal rights are well understood but what about societal liberties and societal rights? Does not the society has right to enjoy peace, prosperity and progress?" Repealing AFSPA is not only in favor of Human Rights.

It is to protect the liberal democratic values. What do you mean by societal liberties and societal rights? AFSPA is an instrument of militarizing the society as a whole. The writer is fully agreed that the society has the right to enjoy, peace, prosperity and progress. But it is not possible without the rights of the individuals in the society because, individuals are the basic components of a society.

You can't expect a society in peace, prosperity and progress where individuals have no right to life, right to dignity, right to protection, and right to freedom of expression and so on. AFSPA suspended all this basic rights of being human.

That is why we need to repeal AFSPA from the society or region or state to bring that society in peace prosperity, and progress. Under the law like AFSPA, no society can progress. Only counter resistance could emerge in society. AFSPA is a law of oppression in society.

In the argument, the author says "Need to learn from the experience of more liberal countries like USA, Australia, UK etc. who have been able to check terror activities by enacting tough laws and making it more difficult for the miscreants to operate."

In my consciences, yes we can't say that states like USA, AUSRALIA and UK are not more liberal countries. At the same time it can't be denied that the United States and their allies in war in Iraq, in the name of protecting" Democracy" are being considered as an imperialist power in the face of people of Iraq. Afghanistan, Vietnam (in the time of war).

By saying, "The USA PATRIOT ACT of 2001 (uniting & strengthening America by providing appropriate tools required to intercept and obstruct terrorism act 2001) has allowed the US security agencies to search telephone, email communications, medical, financial and other records. Australia has given "stop and search" powers to their police, which allow the police to stop and search people."

My argument in this statement is, USA PATRIOT ACT of 2001 does not have any provision to shoot on suspicion without any prosecution to anybody in a categorized area as "disturbed or anything" to the American Armed Forces or American police even after 9/11 subject to American citizens.

But in the American War in Iraq, American armies are empowered to shoot on suspension in war field. In war, you have to shoot your enemy before the enemy shoots you. This is how the Armies are trained. AFSPA is a law of war paradigm.

It is not categorized under the paradigm of "Law and Order" issues. That is why AFSPA does not need Judiciary intervention. There is no space of Judiciary proceeding to punish according to the "rule of Law "under AFSPA. How can you claim a liberal democratic state where one of the important institutions of Democracy, the Judiciary has been already collapsed under the imposition of AFSPA?

Of course, you can claim for India if you clearly said, that India is at war in Manipur or Kashmir or any other affected areas of AFSPA by separating these 'disturbed areas' from the space of territory of India.

To be continued ...