The death of 14 civilians in a botched Army operation on December 4 in Nagaland’s Mon district sent shock waves across the nation. This newspaper in an editorial (Tragedy and trust, December 6) wrote that “a free and fair investigation should be held to get to the bottom of the matter and identify where and how the operation wrong”. In subsequent days, this newspaper published three articles that looked at the incident and its impact from different perspectives. All three articles, not surprisingly, looked closely at the controversial Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA).
Pratap Bhanu Mehta calls the Act “a constitutional abomination that should have been repealed a long time ago”. The Act, Mehta says, “grants extraordinarily sweeping powers to the Armed Forces of search, seizure, arrest, the right to shoot to kill and conduct operations in ways that make a mockery of individual rights and dignity”. AFSPA creates a state of exception in the areas where it is imposed, which in practice results in the suspension of the many rights the Constitutions bestows on citizens. The Justice Jeevan Reddy Commission had called for a repeal of the Act. Mehta argues that “laws such as AFSPA signify the suicide of the Constitution”. The AFSPA, he argues, has “been counterproductive for the Army”. Mehta makes a powerful pitch for the Act to be repealed.
In her detailed analysis of politics in Nagaland, Patricia Mukhim asks: “Why are the northeastern states of India and Jammu and Kashmir singled out for imposition of AFSPA? Aren’t there internal rebellions in the rest of India too, such as “left-wing extremism?” Why are those areas not termed “disturbed areas” followed by the invocation of AFSPA?” Her conclusion is: “The reality is that the Northeast is not only less understood by distant Delhi but is also still considered ‘alien’ to the nation because of racial and cultural dissimilarities.” Mukhim recounts the violent history of AFSPA in the Northeast and the civil society’s multiple attempts to get the Act repealed. Irom Sharmila’s extraordinary Gandhian protest against the Act could not achieve its end. A legal battle in the Supreme Court also failed. In 2016, the Supreme Court sought details of the 1,528 cases of alleged extra-judicial killings between May 1979 and May 2012 by the Manipur Police and the armed forces and asked the CBI to probe a few of those cases. In its report filed in March this year, it (CBI) said it had no conclusive evidence and, therefore, closed the cases, Mukhim writes.
Mukhim acknowledges the complicated political history of Nagaland, but argues that the media has “focussed exclusively on the NSCN (IM) and ignored other Naga National Political Groups (NNPGs), who have been brought on board because they are Nagaland-based and speak exclusively for Nagaland”. She writes, “The NSCN(IM) is led by a Tangkhul Naga from Manipur and the majority of its cadres are also Nagas from Manipur. The NNPGs and the Gaonbura Association of Nagaland doubt NSCN(IM)’s ability to bring lasting peace in Nagaland. They know that the NSCN(IM) is not an organisation with whom dialogue is possible or which is in the habit of examining its conscience and regretting its actions. It exists to recruit resentment and to direct that resentment against the usual target – Delhi or India.”
Mukhim is critical of the NSCN (IM) and calls attention to the political position taken by the Nagaland Gaon Bura Association, the apex body of Nagas which includes all the 16 recognised tribes and the NNPGs barring the NSCN (IM). “These representatives of the Naga people do not demand a separate flag or Constitution because they understand these are tenuous demands. It is a settled issue that there will be no territorial rearrangement and the Naga-inhabited areas of Manipur, Arunachal Pradesh and Assam will not be reorganised for that would unleash a Frankenstein. These groups have also never raised the sovereignty issue. The working committee of the seven Naga National Political Groups, roped in to join the peace talks, are also opposed to the idea of changing interlocutors as and when the NSCN (IM) decides,” she writes. Mukhim concludes that “the people of Nagaland are being held hostage by governments both at the state and the Centre”. She argues that the Centre is seen as “pandering to the political leadership of Nagaland, which is alienated from the people instead of responding to the aspirations of the Naga people.”
Prakash Singh (‘Probe before criticising’, December 11), describes the Mon incident as “terrible” and “a tragedy”, but wants the readers to remember that “the security forces are performing an extremely difficult and complicated task in the midst of multiple insurgencies in the Northeast.” On the repeal of AFSPA, his view is: “The matter could be examined again in consultation with all the stakeholders and a well-considered decision taken, keeping in view the requirements of national security.”
The AFSPA is an admission of the failure of politics. The brutal simplicity of the Act, which enables enforcement of the law using fear and violence, is in sharp contrast to nuance, negotiation and perseverance that define political action.
The nation mourned the death of India’s first Chief of Defence Staff, General Bipin Rawat, his wife, Madhulika, and 11 defence personnel in a helicopter crash near Coonoor, Tamil Nadu on Wednesday. Lt General (retd) D S Hooda ('General Rawat’s Legacy', December 10) recalls his contribution towards military reforms. Major General (retd) Raj Mehta ('A dash of humanity,' December 11) offers a very personal take of General Rawat and his career in the armed forces. The Express editorial ('The good soldier', December 9) recalled his efforts to modernise the military, “a cause close to his heart”.
Ameeta Mulla Wattal’s poignant remembrance of her father and 1971 war hero, Captain Mahendra Nath Mulla, ('Remains of the war,' December 9) on the 50th anniversary of the sinking of INS Khukri, was a reminder of the sorrows of war.
Farmers protesting on Delhi’s borders have started to return home after the GOI gave written assurances in favour of their demands including Minimum Support Price for crops etc. Mukulika Banerjee ('Cultivating hope,' December 11) writes that the very qualities that distinguish agriculture from other professions were behind the success of the farmers' protest. She writes: “Cultivation is a combination of dynamism and stasis, hope and fear, trust and vigilance. Becoming a farmer is as much about learning to hold these sentiments together within the self as it is to farm. These were precisely the qualities of character that the farmers brought to the protests as they set up encampments encircling Delhi.”
Shanta Gokhale’s obituary of Alaknanda Samarth ('Her genius on stage,' December 8) revealed the remarkable life of the actor in theatre.
No comments:
Post a Comment