The Indian government has extended the controversial Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act (AFSPA) in eight districts of Nagaland and three districts of Arunachal Pradesh, citing ongoing security concerns in these northeastern states. This decision has once again sparked debates about the need for such a law and its potential impact on human rights.
The AFSPA, enacted in 1958, empowers armed forces operating in designated ‘disturbed areas’ with extensive powers, including the authority to search, arrest, and even open fire if deemed necessary for maintaining public order. Critics argue that this legislation often leads to abuses and impunity for security personnel.
The latest extension of the AFSPA in Nagaland covers eight districts, including Dimapur, Niuland, Chumoukedima, Mon, Kiphire, Noklak, Phek, and Peren. Additionally, several police station areas in Kohima, Mokokchung, Longleng, Wokha, and Zunheboto districts have also been declared ‘disturbed’ under this act.
In Arunachal Pradesh, the extension applies to the districts of Tirap, Changlang, and Longding, as well as certain areas in Namsai district bordering Assam.
The Indian government, in a statement, justified the extension by citing a review of the law and order situation in both states, suggesting the presence of ongoing security threats that require the continued presence of the AFSPA. However, this move has been met with criticism from various organizations and individuals who argue that the AFSPA is counterproductive and contributes to a climate of fear and violence.
The debate surrounding the AFSPA highlights the complex challenges faced by the Indian government in balancing security concerns with the protection of human rights in areas affected by insurgency and unrest. Despite promises from the government to reduce the application of the AFSPA, its continued extension in key regions of Northeast India raises questions about its long-term effectiveness and its impact on the local population.
In recent years, the central government has taken steps to gradually reduce the scope of the AFSPA, claiming to have lifted it from 70% of the northeastern states. However, its continued presence in sensitive regions like Nagaland, Arunachal Pradesh, and Jammu and Kashmir continues to be a source of contention and raises concerns about the potential for human rights violations.
