AFSPA Extension in Northeast India: Impact and Human Rights Challenges
Explore the implications of the AFSPA extension in Manipur, Nagaland, and Arunachal Pradesh, the challenges to human rights, and the way forward for fiscal autonomy and security in the Northeast.
Context:
The Union Home Ministry has recently extended the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act (AFSPA) for another six months in parts of Manipur, Nagaland, and Arunachal Pradesh. This decision has sparked renewed debate on its effectiveness and the human rights implications of the law, which has been in place for decades to manage insurgency and unrest in the Northeast of India.
What is the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act (AFSPA)?
Enacted in 1958, the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act grants special powers to the armed forces in “disturbed areas” to maintain public order. The law aims to tackle insurgency, separatism, and cross-border terrorism, particularly in the Northeast and Jammu & Kashmir, where civilian administrations often struggle to maintain law and order due to ongoing conflicts.
What powers are given to the armed forces under AFSPA?
Under Section 3 of AFSPA, the armed forces are granted significant powers when deployed in disturbed areas:
-
Use of Force: The military has the authority to use force, including lethal force, against individuals violating the law or causing disturbances.
-
Arrest Without Warrant: Armed forces can arrest individuals without a warrant and carry out searches.
-
Immunity from Prosecution: The armed forces enjoy immunity from prosecution unless sanctioned by the Union Government.
These sweeping powers have been controversial, as they provide the military with significant latitude in dealing with insurgencies and internal conflicts.
Where is AFSPA currently imposed and why?
As of October 2025, it is imposed in various regions of India due to ongoing unrest and insurgency concerns. These areas are:
-
Jammu & Kashmir: The region has been dealing with cross-border terrorism and insurgency, primarily from groups like Hizbul Mujahideen and Lashkar-e-Taiba.
-
Manipur: Ethnic violence erupted in May 2023 between the Meitei and Kuki-Zo communities, leading to the extension of AFSPA to manage the situation.
-
Nagaland: The longstanding insurgency, primarily by the NSCN-K (Khaplang) group, has led to AFSPA’s continued enforcement.
-
Arunachal Pradesh: Increased insurgency activities by factions of the NSCN have warranted the imposition of the act.
-
Assam: Insurgency and militancy, particularly from ULFA (United Liberation Front of Assam), have kept AFSPA in force.
What has AFSPA achieved since its imposition?
Despite the controversy surrounding its use, it has contributed significantly to reducing insurgency and improving security in these troubled regions. Some key achievements include:
-
Insurgency Decline: According to the MHA Annual Report 2023–24, insurgency incidents in the Northeast have reduced by over 80% since 2014.
-
Peace Accords: AFSPA has facilitated peace agreements, such as the Framework Agreement (2015) with the NSCN-IM, paving the way for ceasefire and dialogue.
-
Improved Connectivity & Development: The reduction in insurgency has led to improved infrastructure and development, as noted by the Economic Survey (2021–22), which highlighted that decreased violence has encouraged greater investment in the region.
What challenges is AFSPA facing?
Despite these achievements, it faces several challenges, particularly related to human rights concerns and judicial scrutiny:
-
Human Rights Concerns: Allegations of misuse have been raised, particularly in incidents such as the 2004 Manorama Devi case in Manipur, which led to large-scale protests and public outcry.
-
Judicial Scrutiny: The Supreme Court, in the Extra Judicial Execution Victim Families Association (EEVFAM) vs Union of India (2016) case, held that the use of force under AFSPA must be proportionate and subject to judicial review.
-
Trust Deficit: The Justice Hegde Commission (2013) found several encounter killings in Manipur to be staged, undermining trust in the armed forces and the law’s application.
What are the recommendations for the way forward?
Various committees have provided recommendations for reforming or repealing AFSPA. These include:
-
Justice Jeevan Reddy Committee (2005): Recommended the repeal of AFSPA, suggesting that its provisions be incorporated into the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), 1967.
-
Second Administrative Reforms Commission (2007): Suggested AFSPA should be reviewed and made more humane, with greater emphasis on accountability and procedural safeguards.
-
Verma Committee on Women’s Safety (2013): Called for the exclusion of AFSPA’s immunity in cases of sexual violence to prevent abuse and ensure justice for victims.
-
Parliamentary Standing Committees: Stress phased withdrawal as insurgency declines, recommending a gradual reduction in military powers in the region as peace is restored.
Despite its success in reducing insurgency, AFSPA continues to face legitimacy challenges due to allegations of misuse and human rights violations. The way forward must strike a balance between national security and human rights, with a phased withdrawal of military powers, greater accountability, and the strengthening of local policing systems.
Conclusion:
The extension of AFSPA in the Northeast highlights the ongoing security concerns but also raises serious questions about the long-term impact of such a law on the region’s stability and the lives of its residents. While the law has helped in controlling insurgency and promoting peace agreements, its continued imposition affects the democratic rights of the people living in the affected regions. The challenge remains to find a path that ensures national security while protecting human rights and providing a sustainable future for the people in these states.
Subscribe to our Youtube Channel for more Valuable Content – TheStudyias
Download the App to Subscribe to our Courses – Thestudyias
The Source’s Authority and Ownership of the Article is Claimed By THE STUDY IAS BY MANIKANT SINGH
