Armed Forces Special Powers Act: Demands for change

Major changes to the Armed Forces Special Powers Act would be a politically and legally difficult exercise, but steps can be taken to give it a humane face
A major factor now preventing the return of normalcy in Kashmir is the opposition to the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act, 1958 or AFSPA. Demands are being raised for its repeal or for making it more humane. Another view is that the lawshould be lifted in certain districts of the state. The ministry of defence appears unwilling to accept any changes. Thedeliberations of the Cabinet Committee on Security and the all-party meeting convened by the government in September2010 have also failed to yield a consensus. Despite Prime Minister Manmohan Singh‘s assurance in December 2006 thatchanges would be made in the Act to make it more humane, the law has not been softened. The Justice Jeevan ReddyCommittee report is also believed to have recommended a review of the Act.
What is AFPSA?
AFSPA is a legislative tool designed to confer special powers on armed forces personnel deployed in areas declared as disturbed or dangerous by the government. It was extended to J&K as the Armed Forces (Jammu & Kashmir) Special Powers Act, 1990. The Act confers on an officer of the armed forces the power to:
 Fire upon or otherwise force, even to the point of causing death, any person disregarding orders against unlawful assembly
 Arrest without a warrant
 Enter and search any premises
 Destroy any arms dumps
The Act also provides legal immunity to military personnel for their actions. Their prosecution cannot be initiated without prior permission of the Central government.
What the critics say:
 AFSPA gives military personnel draconian powers
 The Act is a tool in the hand of security forces to perpetrate human rights violations
 The Central government has retained the Act for decades without a valid justification
 Cases against military personnel for grave offences reported by state governments to the ministry of defence have failed to trigger prosecution.
Way forward:
 Any major changes to the Act would be a politically and legally difficult but a number of steps can be taken to give the Act a humane face. Such a formula could gradually bring normalcy.
 To begin with, a probe by way of a staff court of inquiry should be made mandatory in all cases where employment of troops has led to any civilian death or grievous hurt, or caused damage to personal property.
 For the sake of transparency and credibility, all such investigations must be attended by a civilian officer not below the post of a deputy collector.
 Local NGOs should be permitted to take up complaints of human rights violations with local military commanders.These must be treated as requests under the Right to Information Act.
 Cases forwarded to the Central government seeking sanction for the prosecution of military officers for any excesses in the discharge of their duties while operating under AFSPA should be promptly resolved.
 To reduce and discourage the use of lethal force by the security forces, incentives or awards could be instituted for capturing terrorists or militants alive. This may bring down the number of fatal casualties.