Model Answer
0 min readIntroduction
The Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act, 1958 (AFSPA) is a legislative act passed by the Indian Parliament granting special powers to the Indian Armed Forces in “disturbed areas”. Recently, the Tripura government completely withdrew AFSPA from the state in December 2023, marking a significant shift in the security paradigm of the region. This decision, after nearly three decades, has been lauded as a testament to the improved security situation. The question now arises whether this positive development in Tripura provides a suitable context for a more rational and comprehensive policy review regarding the continued application of AFSPA in other parts of the North-Eastern region, balancing security imperatives with civil liberties.
Historical Context of AFSPA in Tripura
AFSPA was imposed in Tripura in February 1990, amidst escalating insurgency by groups like the National Liberation Front of Tripura (NLFT) and the All Tripura Tribal Forces (ATTF). These groups aimed for greater autonomy or secession, leading to widespread violence, displacement, and disruption of normal life. The Act provided the armed forces with broad powers to maintain law and order, including the power to search premises, arrest individuals without warrants, and use force, even to the extent of causing death, in situations where deemed necessary.
Factors Contributing to Improved Security Situation in Tripura
- Decline in Insurgent Activities: Sustained counter-insurgency operations by security forces, coupled with the surrender of many insurgents, significantly reduced the strength and operational capabilities of militant groups.
- Improved Socio-Economic Conditions: Government initiatives focused on socio-economic development, infrastructure improvement, and employment generation addressed some of the root causes of insurgency, particularly among tribal communities. The focus on inclusive development played a crucial role.
- Effective Border Management: Enhanced border security measures, particularly along the India-Bangladesh border, curbed the flow of arms, ammunition, and insurgents into Tripura.
- Political Dialogue and Peace Accords: Successful negotiations with various insurgent groups, leading to peace accords and rehabilitation packages, contributed to the normalization of the situation.
Rationale for Withdrawal of AFSPA
The withdrawal of AFSPA from Tripura is a logical consequence of the sustained peace and stability achieved in the state. Continuing the Act in a relatively peaceful environment would have been counterproductive, potentially alienating the local population and hindering the process of reconciliation. The Tripura Police, along with central paramilitary forces, are now deemed capable of maintaining law and order without the extraordinary powers granted by AFSPA. This decision signals trust in the local law enforcement agencies and demonstrates a commitment to restoring normalcy.
Is it an Appropriate Time for a Broader Policy Review?
The Tripura example presents a compelling case for a rational review of AFSPA’s application in other North-Eastern states. However, a blanket withdrawal is not advisable. A nuanced, state-specific approach is necessary, considering the unique security challenges faced by each state.
Arguments for a Review:
- Human Rights Concerns: AFSPA has been criticized for its potential for abuse and its impact on human rights. The Act’s provisions have been alleged to facilitate extrajudicial killings, arbitrary arrests, and torture.
- Alienation of Local Population: The presence of the armed forces under AFSPA can create a sense of fear and distrust among the local population, hindering the process of peacebuilding.
- Erosion of Civil Liberties: The Act’s provisions restrict fundamental rights, such as freedom of speech and assembly, which are essential for a democratic society.
Arguments Against a Hasty Withdrawal:
- Persistent Insurgency in Some Areas: While Tripura has seen significant improvement, states like Nagaland and Manipur continue to grapple with active insurgencies. Premature withdrawal of AFSPA could embolden insurgents and lead to a resurgence of violence.
- Complex Terrain and Border Issues: The North-Eastern region’s challenging terrain and porous borders make it vulnerable to cross-border infiltration and insurgent activities.
- Need for a Strong Security Presence: Maintaining a strong security presence is crucial to prevent the resurgence of insurgency and ensure the safety and security of the local population.
A Phased Approach to Review
A phased approach to reviewing AFSPA is recommended. This could involve:
- State-Level Committees: Establishing state-level committees comprising representatives from the government, security forces, civil society, and human rights organizations to assess the security situation and make recommendations regarding the continued application of AFSPA.
- Gradual Reduction of Areas Declared ‘Disturbed’: Gradually reducing the areas declared ‘disturbed’ under AFSPA, based on the security situation in those areas.
- Strengthening Local Law Enforcement: Investing in strengthening the capacity of local law enforcement agencies to maintain law and order.
- Promoting Dialogue and Reconciliation: Continuing to promote dialogue and reconciliation with insurgent groups.
| State | Current AFSPA Status (as of Nov 2023) | Security Situation |
|---|---|---|
| Nagaland | AFSPA remains in force in certain districts. | Active insurgency by Naga groups. |
| Manipur | AFSPA partially lifted from certain areas. | Complex security situation with multiple insurgent groups and ethnic tensions. |
| Tripura | AFSPA completely withdrawn. | Significantly improved security situation. |
| Assam | AFSPA partially lifted from certain areas. | Presence of ULFA and other insurgent groups. |
Conclusion
The withdrawal of AFSPA from Tripura is undoubtedly a positive step, signaling a new era of peace and stability in the state. It provides a valuable opportunity to reassess the application of AFSPA in other parts of the North-East. However, a hasty and blanket withdrawal is not feasible. A nuanced, state-specific, and phased approach, prioritizing strengthening local law enforcement, promoting dialogue, and addressing the root causes of insurgency, is crucial to ensure lasting peace and security while upholding human rights and civil liberties. The Tripura model should be viewed as a potential pathway, not a blueprint, for a more rational and humane security policy in the region.
Answer Length
This is a comprehensive model answer for learning purposes and may exceed the word limit. In the exam, always adhere to the prescribed word count.