The Armed Forces Special Powers Ordinance was promulgated on 15 August

1942 against The Quit India Movement. The date is somewhat ironical
considering how the Act is seen today. With six sections giving Indian Armed
Forces special powers in any of the disturbed areas as described under
Section 3 of the Act, AFSPA is, as of now, enforced in the states of Tripura,
Assam, Arunachal Pradesh, Nagaland, Mizoram, Meghalaya and after the 2004
dilution due to the strong protest of the civil society, in parts of Manipur. These
states are covered by AFSPA 1958. Due to high insurgency after the allegedly
rigged elections in J&K in 1987, the AFSPA 1990 covered the state of Jammu and
Kashmir. Given the historical backdrop of the Act, AFSPA has been a controversial
enactment by the Centre, finding its birth in the tension caused by the arrest of
the Naga Leaders of the Naga National Council or the militant insurgency in the
state of J&K. The major legal provisions of the AFSPA include:
In an area declared disturbed an army officer is legal free to carry out
following operations:
a) Fire upon or otherwise use force, even to the causing of death, against any
person who is acting in contravention of any law" against "assembly of five or
more persons" or possession of deadly weapons
b) Destroy any shelter (private or govt.) from which armed attacks are made or
likely to be made or attempted to be made.
c) Arrest any person without warrant who has committed a cognizable offence or
against whom a reasonable suspicion exists that he has committed or is about to
commit a cognizable offence.
d) Enter and search, without warrant, any premises for purpose of arrest or to
recover any person, arms, explosives.
e) To search and seize any vehicle suspected to be carrying an offender or any
person against whom any reasonable suspicion exists that he has or is about to
commit an offence.
f) To provide legal immunity to the army personnel found involved in any
violation or ethical breach i.e., they cannot be sued or prosecuted.
To a citizen living in any of these disturbed areas, the Act comes as a license to
kill handed over to the Armed Forces, a licence which might have been necessary
to combat the growing tension in these areas in 1960s and in 1990s, but has
simultaneously resulted in numerous wrongful detentions, rapes, murders and a
strong opposition to the presence of armed forces in the North East and in the
Jammu and Kashmir.
The Anti AFSPA Movement, with Irom Sharmila as the widely known icon of the
movement since she began her hunger strike against the Act in 2000, saw a
sudden eruption of protests in 2004 in the state of Manipur. The public agitation
was triggered by the brutal rape and murder of Thangjam Manorama Devi by the
personnel of Assam Rifles. The state government had to promulgate curfew for
several days and the unrest continued for about three months. With numerous
Human Rights organizations active in the North East as well as J&K, the
movement has seen its highs and lows. The Naga Peoples Movement for Human
Rights, established in 1978, has taken up Human Rights issues in the area, along
with numerous Public Interest Litigations in the Supreme Court of India. It was on
December 29, 1980 that women activists in Manipur, for the first time rescued a

civilian, Ibomcha Laishram, from the hands of the Army personnel who had come
to his home to arrest him on charge being a link man of the insurgents. The
movement just picked up similar incidents and reports, outbreaks of protests and
agitation. In 1982, the NPMHR successfully organized a women fact finding team
from New Delhi to visit Urkhul District in Manipur state to investigate and report
the cases of atrocities caused by the Army on the civilians. Similar reactions to
the Act have been seen in almost all states that the Act is active in. The Supreme
Court admitted writ petitions from human rights organisations which contended
that in Manipur more than 1,500 persons were killed in fake encounters. Six
cases were randomly selected and a lower court examined them. There was
prima facie evidence of abuse of power. In Srinagar, in 2011, the Save Sharmila
Solidarity Campaign was initiated to spread awareness about Irom Sharmila and
to generate public support for her. This was the first time in history when any
such campaign focused on the repeal of AFSPA had been launched in 21 states of
India. The Campaign stood for the thousands of people killed, tortured, lost in the
North East states and J&K. Irom Sharmilas demand to repeal AFSPA made her a
symbol of peace and a strong voice against AFSPA.
The campaign has said to have received support of more than 50 organizations
including National Alliance of Peoples Movement (NAPM), Asha Parivar, Khudai
Khidmatgar, Mission Bhartiyam, Sadbhav mission, ANHAD, J&K RTI Movement,
INSAF, PEACE, Centre for Social justice (J&K), Yuva Koshish, SAMAR, Le Mashale,
Society for Youth Development, Asian Centre for Social Studies, Just Peace
Foundation, We The Common People (WTCP), Student Islamic Organization (SIO),
Mahila Chetna Kendra, Jagriti Mahila Samiti, Inqualab Zindabad, Society for Youth
Development, Save Democracy Repeal AFSPA, Rights Initiative, Islamic Releif &
Research Trust (Kashmir) and many others.
Several human rights groups, including the North East Students' Organisation,
have also been demanding withdrawal of AFSPA. Amnesty International has
campaigned enthusiastically against the legislation, holding it as a violation of
international human rights laws. When India presented its second periodic report
to the United Nations Human Rights Committee in 1991, members of the UNHRC
asked numerous questions about the validity of the AFSPA. They questioned the
constitutionality of the AFSPA under Indian law and asked how it could be
justified in light of Article 4 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political
Rights, ICCPR. On 31 March 2012, the UN asked India to revoke AFSPA saying it
had no place in Indian democracy.
In view of the outcry against AFSPA, the central government had appointed a
five-member committee headed by Supreme Court Justice B.P. Jeevan Reddy to
examine whether the legislated law was required or not. After visiting all affected
states, the committee submitted its report to the central government in October
2006, which included the following recommendations:
(a) AFSPA should be repealed and appropriate provisions should be inserted in
the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967;
(b) The Unlawful Activities Act should be modified to clearly specify the powers of
the armed forces and paramilitary forces and
(c) Grievance cells should be set up in each district where the armed forces are
deployed.
The 5th report of the Second Administrative Reforms Commission on public order
has also recommended the repeal of the AFSPA.

These recommendations have not been implemented.

Resistance from the military establishment and the Indian state towards the
revocation or even the dilution of the Act has been covered up statements calling
the Act an enabling Act and necessary for the territorial integrity of the
country. The people, however, do not come anywhere close to these
justifications. For it is not the enabling parts of the Act that the protests are held
against, but the protection this Act gives to armed personnel in cases of rape,
sexual violence, murder and wrongful detention. The National Alliance of Peoples
Movement has been a leading organization in the Anti AFSPA movement. NAPM,
in all its statements and its social awareness campaigns stresses on the virtual
immunity that the Act provides to officers in persecution. In Manipur, Irom
Sharmila has been on an indefinite fast for 15 years now, seeking the repeal of
the act in Manipur. Till date, the government has not agreed to this demand.
Even with the amendment in 1972, leading to the powers of declaring an area
disturbed shifting from the Centre to the State government, the people of
affected areas have been in constant disapproval of the Act.
Recently, the Jammu and Kashmir government has asked for some parts of the
state to be removed from the list of 'disturbed areas'. However, the army has
opposed this and according to news reports, a compromise formula is being
framed to be discussed at the meeting of the unified command (the highest
decision making body on the security affairs of the state). With the PDP-BJP
coalition coming into shape, AFSPA has been a major issue in discussion, and not
without reason. The people of Kashmir have, under the J&K RTI Movement taken
a stand against AFSPA and its social impact in the states.