AFSPA is a law out of suspicion and Racial Prejudices

Seram Rojesh *

This is with reference to an article "A draconian act" written by Geoffery, The writer justifies the shortest and most draconian act of the world, 'the Armed Forces (Manipur and Assam) Special Powers act, 1958 on the ground that there is Militancy, which has only seven provisions. AFSPA, 1958 became a part of Indian constitution under chapter 3 in 1958 even though Manipuri representatives strongly opposed the act, which has British colonial legacy in India, after it was passed in 1958. Eminent Indian scholar like Dr. Ramchandra Guha agreed that "India democracy is 50/50 democracy in a talk program at Delhi university V.C hall in the context of the constitutionality with the principle of Democracy with reference to the AFSPA, 1958.

It is for the kind information to Mr.Jeoffery that The AFSPA, 1958 is originated from the British colonial law "the armed forces ordinance 1942", which was not applied in Manipur during British rule as "princely state". When the ordinance was introduced in India, it was strongly opposed by Indian national Congress before the end of World War 2. It allows only Non commission officer to shot on suspicion, where in AFSPA, all the officers are allowed to shot on suspicion and no inquire could be conducted without the Indian (central) government sanction.

Before justifying The AFSPA, 1958 on the ground that there are militancy in Manipur and the situation what is going on; Mr.Jeoffery is suggested to analyze the historical background of the 'act' .What is the Politics behind this act? What were the policies and approaches adopted by the Nehru Government? What was the perception of the first home minister of India, Sadar Bhalabhai Patil who is known as the 'iron man of India'? How it effect to Indian Polity?

Sadar Patil mentioned about his suspicion and prejudices about the region in a letter written on 7 November 1950, he wrote, "the people inhabiting these portions have no established loyalty or devotion to India. Even the Darjeeling and Kalingpang areas are not free from pro Mongoloid prejudices" (see Das, 1974, p.338) .It shows that even though territorially north eastern stats are part of India, including Manipur war taken over by dominion of India in 1949, these area was excluded from the 'Idea of India' and have suspicious on the people of the region who are predominantly Mongoloid by race. What he was trying to convey to Nehru was clear that 'they should be keep under surveillances' because they are 'mongoloid'.

In the Speech in Lok Shabha, New Delhi, during debate on the Naga Hills Situation, August 23, 1956, Nehru said, "I should like the house to remember that they should look at this in the larger context of our general policy in these areas, not only in Naga Hills but in the NEFA (Arunachal Pradesh) and neighboring areas. Many of these areas were for the first time brought under some kind of administration during the last six to eight years". It shows that Nehru not only look into Naga Hills but also look into all the areas with 'a general policy'. What is Nehru's General Policies in this area? He further said, "Since bombing would not be effective in an area where people live in a scattered manner. But we would not do so" .What is the meaning of this statement? He made this very offensive statement about the area. It means Nehru wanted bombing in the area but he did not do so because it could not kill many people since people live in a scattered manner. Thanks god people live in a scattered manner otherwise the area would have been bombed by Indian military forces, besides killing people and burning the villages.

He also reported in the house, "We had of course to shoot some because they shot at us". "Ever less, our instruction is that patience must be exercises because we want to win over these people", "but make it clear to the hostile that a person who used his gun against us will be met with gun .army can't be withdrawn". It is already presumed in His mind that India is at war with the people of the region. It reflects the content of India's general policies in the region at that time. He also says, "I consider it fantastic for that little corer between China and Burma and India to be called an Independent States" It shows his Imperialist idea in the south East Asia and disrespect small Nationalities.

Very interesting point to be mentioned here about Nehru's (father of AFSPA, 1958) mind and attitude towards the region, he reported, "It was easy enough to declare martial law and hand over the whole area to the military, but we did not do so because we have been against treating this as a purely military problems". From his statement, it is clear that, one year before, AFSPA was introduced in parliament he has already in his minds to declare military law and handed over the region to the military. The most hostile part of Nehru was, he thought to declare a military law was "easy enough". Is it easy to hand over the whole population to a military? He already knows the danger of military law; he says "Naturally when armed forces function and have to deal with hostile elements the civil power's activities are rather limited". How can he refer a community, a region with "hostile element". It shows his perception about the region of the people as "non Human being', All nonsense politics are very easy to Nehru.

Another question, why Nehru and his Congress party put Manipur categorically even though Manipur was under Assam Administrative Unit in 1958, when AFSPA was passed in Parliament as "the Armed Forces (Manipur and Assam) Special Powers act, 1958.They could have passed without the name of Manipur. What is the politics as far as Manipur is concerned with this act? There was no major rebellion in both Manipur hills and valley as compare with Naga Hills. Yes in 50s, Communist and Meetei State committee's initial armed movement was there. When Naga of Naga hills boycotted Indian first parliamentary election, a Tangkhul Naga was elected from outer Manipur constituency. There was peace in Manipur. Then, why Manipur was in the mind of the Act? Is it because of Nehru was ignorant about Manipur. No Nehru came to Manipur in 1953. He describes, as "Manipur is a jewel of India". Manipur dance collage was renamed as 'Jawaharlal Nehru Manipur Dance Academy'. He knows that the majority of the Manipuri people belong to Vaisnavite Hindu religion. No popular organization was there besides Political parties. Students organization, The All Manipur Students Union was established in 1964 after Six years of AFSPA introduced in Parliament. Why, Manipur was mentioned Particularly with Assam in the act before there was no even Students organization? forget about Militant organizations ( UNLF, 24, NOV, 1964; PLA, 25SEPTEMBER, 1978; PREPAK, 9, OCT,1977;KCP,13 APPRIL, 1980;KYKL,JANUARY,1994;NSCN,1980; NSCN,(IM)AND (K),1988;KNF,18 MAY,1988;KNO-KNA,1988;KLA,1992;KRA,DECEMBER1999;UKLF,29 MARCH,2000;KNC,29DEC.2005;ZRO-ZRA,1993AND1997.)

The answer is simple that, People like, A Kashmiri Pandit Nehru who wrote 'the Glimpse of world', 'discovery of India' properly understand the armed movement of the national liberation in Africa ,Latin America, Asia , Europe .He might have aware of Aristotle's 'theory of Revolution'. The rights of self-determination are given for every nationalities including Manipur under Universal declaration of human rights in 1948. He is quite aware of that a big country cannot annexed a small nation and keep under her colony. It can be apply absolutely in Manipur context. Nehru and congress could have not forgotten how Manipur, a first democratic country in south East Asia was 'take over' by dominion of India in 1949 without the consent of the Manipur National Assembly, the political crime committed by Indian state against Manipur. As, I, already mentioned that, Nehru did not wanted to see any Independent country between India and Burma and China. He and his congress party already realized the possibilities of the resistance from the people of Manipur for her National and political rights in the future, which she has been maintaining in the last many centuries; except in two historical times. People of Manipur have no culture to be ruled by 'others'. Nehru and congress party already knew that something would be happening in future India. That is why Nehru categorically put 'Manipur' especially by realizing special political character of Manipur.

My humble submission is that, the AFSPA,1958, was not to counter Naga militants in Naga hills, it is a part of the Nehru's general policies and approach to suppress and oppressed the people of the region who are culturally, racially(mongoloid), economically different from mainland India. AFSPA is a result of 'politics of Suspicion' and 'racial prejudices' to maintain the 'territorial integrity' of in India within the framework of 'military paradigm' particularly North east territory of India which 90% of the territory are border with Foreign countries including China, Burma, Bangladesh, Bhutan. Until and unless these general policies and approaches are changed, the pre-colonial law like AFSPA will not be repealed by the Indian State. If it goes another form of law will come into exist. That is why Pota could not retain more than two years where AFSPA is in the constitution of India in the last five decades without any discussion.

I want to ask the writer, Mr. Geoffrey and those who support this 'Act' that Is there and country in the world who have similar law Like AFSPA,1958 ,where whole area is a subject not to particular individuals or groups of people. Nazi laws were subject to 'Jews' not to the 'whole region or area'. Is there any permanent law like AFSPA in Pakistan or military rule state in Burma? As the writer said, "the writer is not canvassing for AFSPA but there is need to introspect and arrive at a point when the state does not feel the necessity to declare the area as disturbed". In my opinion, this is not the question. The question is that state has no right at all to declare and area or region or a Law like AFSPA. We are in 21st century. This is an outdated law. Indian state should have the courage to solve the political problem with democratically, but not by means of subjugation through military means, as it is. I am opposing this act is not only because It is also applicable in Manipur. It is because that, AFSPA is against the humanity and Human Civilization. I would like to remind to the writer that we are not creating the situation what is happening today in Manipur. It is counter product of general policies and approach of Indian state. Yes, I do agree that we have some responsibilities also. We all including writer needs to answer some questions,

1. Are armies under AFSPA, able to stop Tax or 'extortion'? These are happening in the last 50 years.
2. Even after cease fire, why army is not able to arrest for those who collects so called 'Extortion' or 'Donation from people' from national highway 39 and 53?;
3. Was they able to stop Kuki–Naga, Kuki–Paite, Meetei-Meetei Pangal clash? Was AFSPA able to stop clash between UNLF. The answer is No, No, No, AFSPA, 1958 only killed common people, protected Rapist army; provide unaccountable money to military, and many many, nothing else. Militant are militarily became stronger day by day under AFSPA. There is still time to rethink to change the approach and repeal the act.