Sharmila On long trial

You are here: Home » features » Profile of Manipuri Personalities » Irom Sharmila

E-Pao! David Buhril - Sharmila: On long trial

Sharmila: On long trial

By:- David Buhril *

Irom Sharmila Chanu, the relentless fighter who is fasting for the repeal of the Armed Forces Special Powers Act 1958 (AFSPA) came to Delhi on May 11, 2007. She was accompanied by the Manipur jail authorities, her doctor and nurses to appear in the court of Ms. Kamini Lau, Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (ACMM) at Patiala House Court Complex on the charge of intending to commit suicide.

Sharmila was taken into custody vides FIR No.222 under Section 309 that was filed after her arrest on October 7, 2006 in New Delhi where she was arrested during her protest. Section 309 IPC carries a maximum punishment of simple imprisonment of one-year or fine or both.

What about the Satyagraha’s instrument, is the question that every Sharmila’s supporter has been asking. Sharmila honestly told the court in her feeble voice, “It is my only instrument. I have no other means”, when she was asked why she wanted to end her life by fasting.

Miss Irom Sharmila with an AFSPA banner

Sharmila sat between the two jail wardens of Manipur who accompanied her for the hearing. There was a pipe attached to her nose that was used to feed her as she waited for her turn at the courtroom. Her chin was heavily bandaged too. It was no make up that she chose for herself. But they have become accessories like for the relentless fighter.

But the accessories are what they keep her alive as she waited to appeal that she did not mean to take her life, which is also precious to her. The waiting game did not seem to surprise her though, as she was already chiselled with patience in her six-year fasting for the repeal of AFSPA. Sharmila waited over four hours in the courtroom before she was summoned. The manner of procession and the colonial language that was used in the heated courtroom would have reminded her of the colonial act that is seen as “draconian” in the North East.

When Sharmila appeared before the magistrate, she was flooded with questions. The magistrate, Ms Kamini Lau asked: Why do you want to end your life like that when it is a gift from God? Can you allow it to slip away like this? Sharmila did not seem to find it difficult to find an answer even though she took a little time to respond.

Standing between the jail authorities who helped her to stand and the two advocates, Colin Gonsalves, Senior Advocate and VK Ohri, Advocate, Sharmila managed to utter few but powerful words. She said, “It is my bounding duty in response to society’s situation. I think this is God’s will.”

Irom Sharmila’s counsels stated that Sharmila came to Delhi on October 4, 2006 to continue her peaceful protest. The Delhi Police arrested her on October 7 from Jantar Mantar, which was her protesting stage then. The Delhi Police at All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS) then continuously kept Sharmila in custody. Sharmila’s counsels alleged that the authorities at AIIMS asked Sharmila to “pay and leave the hospital.”

She was then transferred to Ram Manohar Lohia Hospital where she stayed until her return to Imphal’s JN Hospital. After her arrest since October 7, 2006, Sharmila’s counsels said that she was never produced before a magistrate even though she was taken into custody. Her counsels said that after she was arrested, Sharmila was not permitted to leave the hospital “where she was incarcerated.

There was a police guard at all times and she was not allowed to leave.” Sharmila’s counsel said, “The police take the stand that she was not arrested.” “The arrest and detention in custody without producing her before any magistrate”, Sharmila counsels said, “is clearly illegal.”

Sharmila’s counsel said that although Sharmila was charged under Section 309 IPC accusing her of intending to commit suicide, she has never had any intent to commit suicide. “Mere fasting”, Sharmila’s counsel said, “cannot be construed as a criminal offence under Section 309. She values life. She does not want to die.”

Sharmila’s counsel said that Section 309 is not applicable to Sharmila as her effort was not to take her own life but to protest against the “draconian act.” They said that the detention and arrest of Sharmila was illegal. They also told the court that Sharmila couldn’t bear the injustice perpetrated on the people of Manipur and the North East by the security forces who are operating illegally and ruthlessly under the cover of the AFSPA. Sharmila’s counsels also added: “AFSPA was suitable for the British colonial Raj. Democracy, decency and the AFSPA cannot go together.”

Sharmila’s counsel s quoted the Fundamental Duties enumerated in the Constitution under 51A(b): “to cherish and follow the noble ideals which inspired our national struggle for freedom.” They said that the noble ideals that inspired India’s struggle for freedom was Satyagraha and non- violence.

The hunger fast, which the Father of the nation adopted, was one of the central methods of non-violent struggle. Sharmila’s counsels said, “The Father of our nation, Mahatma Gandhi taught us this.” They also asked: “Can it, however, be said that he was attempting to commit suicide.” Sharmila’s counsel said that it is strange that in independent India the Indian police should use Section 309 IPC against person like Sharmila who followed the principle of non-violence and is engaging in a perfectly legitimate form of protest.

Sharmila’s counsels are also concerned about the security personnel who are endangering the life of Irom Sharmila. Earlier, Sharmila had stated before the High Court at Delhi that the Delhi Police and the Manipur Police are treating her in a manner that endanger her life.

They said that the police had made Sharmila to undergo an arduous journey from Manipur to Delhi after more than six years of fasting. Sharmila’s counsels also said, “The Delhi police and the Manipur police should be held accountable for any harm that should happen to Irom Sharmila.” The counsels also asked why neither the Manipur police nor the Delhi police informed the court of Sharmila’s health condition.

Sharmila’s counsels also requested for her release. Sharmila’s counsels said that the treatment meted to Sharmila by the authorities was disrespect to a person who is standing for a noble cause.

Sharmila was recently awarded the Gwangju prize for Human Rights, 2007 on May 18, 2007. The award was instituted by the Gwangju Asian Human Rights Folk School, which is a South Korean human rights body. Sharmila’s brother, Irom Singhajit received the award on Sharmila’s behalf. On receiving the award Sharmila said that she is “somehow happy. But it is not really my desire to bag award. My struggle is not for the sake of fame or award.”

Sharmila, aged around 35 years, who, today, weighs a little heavier than her age, however continue to make her stand clear when she said: “They will send me wherever God will. They may send me to Andaman and Nicobar Island or Tihar or anywhere, I will still continue my fast until AFSPA is repealed.”

However, Sharmila was admitted to regular bail on furnishing a personal bond to the tune of Rs.10,000. Taking into account Sharmila’s medical condition and the difficulties to travel from Imphal to Delhi, Sharmila’s counsels were advised to move appropriate request before the Supreme Court as the court of the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate does not have any jurisdiction to transfer the case to Imphal of its own.

Meanwhile, since Sharmila was no longer required as she has been admitted to bail, she was allowed to be taken back to Imphal. As she prepares to leave the court, Sharmila said: “In Manipur they produce me in court every fortnight.” The relentless fighter also said, “My struggle is exceptional.”

On being asked whether she felt lonely ever, before leaving the courtroom, the poet and human rights activist said, “No, we come here on earth alone and will also depart alone.”

David Buhril, a research scholar in JNU, contributes regularly to e-pao.net. The writer can be contacted at davidbuhril(AT)yahoo(dot)com . This article was webcasted on June 04th, 2007

* 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.