By M C Arun
The history of people’s movement against the enactment of AFSPA goes back to 1958 when the Act was about to be passed in the parliament. Perhaps, it is this Act that is well known among the people of North East India in general and of Manipur in particular. Other Acts are least known; it is quite sure that some of the Manipuri may not know what IPC stands for; but all of them would know what is AFSPA for. The journey of the Act and agitations against it starts with a parliamentary debate. The opposition to the Act also started on the same floor. Protests came up and turn to public agitations. As time passes, every year, the interpretation of the enactment (some may like to call imposition) of this Act ranges from ‘step-motherly treatment of North East Indians’ by mainland India to the “unequal treatment of Indian citizens” on the basis of geographical region to the legacy of colonialism in periphery India and further to violation of basic human rights. Initially, the agitation was spearheaded by student unions, then by legal experts, and by civil society organizations. As the journey of the agitation against the Act moves forward, the Act itself changes from AFSP (Assam and Manipur) Act, 1958 to the deletion of words “(Assam and Manipur)” for giving a national character of the Act so that the state would negate the interpretation of its selectiveness in enforcing the Act. In order to pacify the people’s agitating mood, the Supreme Court gives certain codes of conduct which cannot be enforced in case of any complaints or excess on the part of the armed forces. The Act and its constitutionality, its politics, its necessity for national security and many more have been discussed in different forums at State- and national-level. But, for the people of Manipur, the history of the Act and agitation against it has a different meaning in their collective mind. The people have passed through the stage of evaluation of the Act in political, legal and constitutional domains; they begin to evaluate the means of their agitation for the Repeal of this Act. They have no doubt in saying that the Act should be repealed because they do not like other Indian citizens to suffer under the shadow of Act 1958.
From student and youth agitation, the agitation went to advocate and others who believed in legal institutions. A case was filed and legal battles fought. They could not harvest any fruit. The only gain was that Supreme Court gave general directives to the States and the armed forces. The history witnessed a remarkable turn when one girl started fasting unto death demanding the repeal of this Act. She was arrested on the grounds of attempt to ‘suicide’ without giving any political meaning of her act of fasting. She was again released for a couple of days; she sat down once again for another round of fasting. She was re-arrested on the same ground. The story goes on till today. Twelve years have passed but no change in political history of the Act. Nothing moves along the path of non-violence agitation of the girl who is supported by many organizations and individuals, inside and outside the State. Some visitors of political or socio-cultural bodies visit in her confinement; they may give moral support out of which nothing germinates. On the other hand, the dead body of Manorama ignited the minds of the people in 2004. She was found dead allegedly executed by personnel of 17 Assam Rifles. The personnel could not be touched by the people of India because of their impunity under the Act. The people of Manipur rose up and shouted for justice as well as repeal of the Act which protected or motivated the security personnel. The violent agitation lasted for about two months. 7 Assembly segments were freed from the shadow of the Act because of the violent agitation. Even the Central Government had to listen to the people. Though no visible result came out of the agitation, the people, who faced the ugliest face of state repression, were proud thinking that they contributed to the cause of AFSPA issue. The Issue however cannot gain its momentum at the national level as the people of India in rest of the country do not know the AFSPA atmosphere. That is why Sharmila is seen as humanist without seeing her political demand; condolences from other parts of India had been read on immature demise of Manorama. The stories of the two girls from Manipur tell two different stories of AFSPA agitation. 12 years from Sharmila, 8 years from Manorama and 58 years from the enactment, AFSPA is still roaming around the democratic space of India. The people have already tested four means of agitation against the giant Act of 1958: the student movement with demonstration and other traditional methods of mass movements; the legal actions such as PIL; the non-violence means; and violent agitation. All the four means could not yield any result. Now even the government does not pay any attention to any such agitations. Nor does it explain to the people the necessity of the Act. Sharmila can pull the days of her fasting; can her fasting or mode of fasting give ‘suitable’ pressure on Government for repealing the Act? The answer is not fully affirmative. Can people mobilize the heat over the Manorama’s dead once again? Another negative answer. Will it be fruitful to move the door of Supreme Court once again? A doubt. Which way should the people of Manipur go further — following Sharmila, continuation of Monorama or knocking Supreme Court’s door? No visible answer.
Now, the people of Manipur need to re-evaluate currently available means. And they need to adopt a single means. The collective efforts should be directed. Keeping a girl alive with nose feeding is medically, ethically and politically wrong. It is not proper on the part of state to wait till the heat of her agitation cool down. It is not question of a single individual’s demand; it is a political demand of the people. The difference may be there among the people but it is not over the goal of their agitation. The State should understand that the Act is so unpopular in this part of the country; hence continuance of the enforcement of this type of Act is undemocratic. One notable thing is that the Act is interpreted by many giving a sharp demarcation of ‘Us’. The development or re-enforcement of this sense of ‘Us’ is worse than the physical force AFSPA aims to curb with. The social and political division arisen out of the operation of the Act is making ground for breeding of many discontent ideologies. Therefore, the Act is always suicidal on the part of India. On the other hand, the people’s agitation should not be kept prolonged. An individual’s fasting with nose feeding cannot yield necessary pressure; on the other hand, the people cannot create an atmosphere that may deify the agitator so that the demand could not be set aside by the government. Or the people cannot, for time being, go violent as witnessed just after Monorama’s dead. The self immolation of a youth and naked protest of 12 Manipuri ladies in front of Assam Rifle Cantonment Area were not a matter of joke. They are the indicators of the seriousness of the people. The joke of the history is that there is no more heat of protest in public domain over the issue. Certain celebrations associated with AFSPA movement are becoming so localized.