The deteriorating centre-state relations specially with regard to the Centre’s insistence of the establishment of National Counter-terrorism Centre (NCTC), an overarching security apparatus of the state, will no doubt loom large over the internal security meet in New Delhi on April 16 although a separate meeting for NCTC has been scheduled May 5. The proposed NCTC will empower the central agency to search, seize, and also make arrests without notice to the States. It is specially this clause which has enraged friends and foes alike. The unilateral decision and the lack of a consultative process before announcing the decision to set up the NCTC is a major grievance of most state governments. There are enough forums, like for instance the Inter-State Council and the National Development Council to flag such vital issues. In fact, the states were not duly consulted when the Centre set up the National Investigating Agency (NIA) in 2009. India’s NCTC seems to be modeled on its American counterpart, yet in the US the NCTC does not have powers to make arrests or of interrogation. The unilateral decision had drawn sharp criticism from the Chief Ministers of various states. They see it as an encroachment on the powers of the states, usurpation of states’ authority, and a danger to the federal polity. Again, we cannot simply brush aside the concerns of the states that the powers that be at the Centre could use the proposed NCTC against political opponents.
With regard to the Jammu and Kashmir and the Northeast, the Centre cannot simply ignore the recent remarks of the UN Special Rapporteur on Human Rights Defenders Margaret Sekaggya and Special Rapporteur on Extrajudicial, Summary and Arbitrary Executions Christof Heyns with regard to Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA). Christof Heyns had specifically called for its repeal saying that AFSPA has no place in a democracy. He had also said that AFSPA in effect allows the state to override rights in the disturbed areas in a much more intrusive way than would be the case under a state of emergency, since the right to life is in effect suspended, and this is done without the safeguards applicable to states of emergency. While the Union Home Ministry has floated the idea of suitable amendments to the Act considering the recommendations of Jeevan Reddy Committee and other reports, the Defence Ministry is deadly against such an idea. The Group of Interlocutors on Jammu and Kashmir in their final report had in fact called for a positive response from the Union Defence Ministry to proposals for repeal of and amendments to the draconian Act. The report quoted Prime Minister`s Working Group on Confidence-Building Measures which had recommended reviewing the Disturbed Areas Act and AFSPA. The Jeevan Reddy Commission had proposed the repeal of the AFSPA and the incorporation of some of its provisions in the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act. We are sure, the Jammu and Kashmir Chief Minister Omar Abdullah would certainly flag these recommendations in the meet, while it is not certain in the case of Manipur CM. Internal security discussions in the case of J & K and the northeast more particularly Manipur need to be seen through the prism of AFSPA and its negative fallout. It cannot simply be ignored with phrases like ‘till situations improve’ or ‘the need for a conducive atmosphere’ while in actuality it is leading to further deterioration of the volatile situation and infecting even the state forces. A glaring example of that was the series of fake encounters by state forces culminating in the July 23 incident of Khwairamband Bazar. One need not elaborate further on the negative impact of the Act. But we must say that, the public angst against AFSPA may blow over anytime.