The law and order bluff : Alibi for militarisation
- The Sangai Express Editorial :: January 13 2012 -

Student's stage sit-in protest in front of Kangla Gate Imphal for Irom Sharmila on Nov 5 2011 :: Pix - Bullu Raj

Manifesto wise, the BJP has been the first to get off the starting block. Promises galore and while the delivery part remains to be seen the 34 point policy laid down by the saffron party is interesting.

An election manifesto is a public document, a well drafted policy and programme of what it intends to do, obviously to woo the people and in doing this, the BJP has demonstrated that it has not been able to break itself free from the jaundiced views which all political parties suffer from and nothing illustrates this better than some of the points it has laid down as its election manifesto.

The document, read manifesto, may have been drafted with a myopic vision or it could be a result of intensive backroom manoeuvres to camouflage the real issues with what it thinks are some cleverly worded phrases and sentences.

Obviously the Armed Forces Special Powers Act figures high on its list, or at least this is the impression it has sought to convey, as this occupies position number 2 in the list of 34 points and here we quote them, 'BJP will bring Law and Order in such a situation where AFSPA, 1958 is not required. Any human right violation will not be tolerated.'

In the first place, the saffron party has assumed and concluded that AFSPA has been imposed due to the law and order problem, while all logical deductions say that the Army Act cannot be anything to do with the law and order situation.

That there can be no law and order problem stretching for fifty years or so is common sense. The catch word law and order vis-a-vis AFSPA is a misnomer.

To require military assistance to keep the law and order situation under check or control for half a century or so is nothing but a bluff, a political bluff that has been played on the consciousness of the people for far too long.

Another argument that one usually comes across to justify the continued imposition of AFSPA is the 'extraordinary' situation prevailing in places where this Act has been imposed. This is where the biggest lie stands exposed.

No situation or no law and order situation can be 'extraordinary' for five or so decades at a stretch.

This is nothing but a bluff to justify the continued militarisation of the region and Manipur. The very term 'extraordinary' suggests it is something out of the ordinary and hence it cannot be permanent. It should be specifically temporary and herein lies the law and order eye wash that has been called all these years.

Election manifestos are meant to attract the attention of the people. Fundamentally there is nothing wrong with this and in fact election manifestoes of all political parties should ideally be the subject for intense scrutiny, discussions and debates of the people.

The election manifesto of the BJP is certainly not an exception and herein lies the need to dissect it. The fundamental problem with AFSPA is the use of the Army under some cleverly coined phrases such as 'law and order' and 'extraordinary' circumstances. This is superfluous.

Militarisation of a region in the name of law and order and extraordinary situation cannot be any justification and this is what the BJP ought to understand when it talks about addressing the issue of AFSPA.

No other law in the country advocates or suggests the use of the military to help in the maintenance of law and order. Not the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act more popularly known as TADA, not the Prevention of Terrorist Activities Act or POTA, which replaced TADA and certainly not the Maharastra Control of Organised Crime Act.

The point is nowhere in the country, other than the North East and Kashmir, is the Army called out to deal with issues which are strictly within the domain of the civil administration.

Using the military and at the same time refusing to declare a region as conflict zones amount to something more sinister. There can be no greater bluff than justifying large scale militarisation of a region or a place in the name of law and order for decades.

Or if the extraordinary situation has existed for more than 50 years or so to justify the deployment of the Army then all political parties should have the conviction to say, 'Yes the issue confronting Manipur' need to be viewed beyond the realm of law and order.

This is step number one towards working out a solution. The question is whether any party is ready to take their call on this.