Ravi Nitesh reports on Irom Sharmila’s 14 year hunger strike against the Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA) in force across North Eastern India and Jammu and Kashmir.
In India, the world’s largest ‘democracy’, there is an activist named Irom Sharmila Chanu (popularly known as “Iron lady of Manipur”) who has been on hunger strike since November 2nd, 2000. Her hunger strike is the longest in the world and is still continuing.
Irom Sharmila is demanding the repeal the Armed Forces Special Powers Act 1958 (AFSPA). She started her hunger strike after the ‘Malom incident’ (also known as the Malom massacre), wherein 10 people, who were waiting at bus stand in Malom, were killed in the indiscriminate firing of the Assam Rifles. Irom became so affected by this incident that she decided to go on a protest against the AFSPA which permitted this and similar such incidents.
The AFSPA is a law which grants arbitrary powers to the armed forces. It empowers the armed forces (even non-commissioned officers) to shoot on mere suspicion, to arrest without warrant, to destroy property and to enter and search under section 4. But it doesn’t stop here.
The AFSPA also provides legal impunity to the armed forces. In the case of arrests without warrant, while the normal procedure elsewhere in India is to produce the person before the magistrate within 24 hours of arrest, section 5 of the AFSPA states that ‘Any person arrested or taken in to custody under this act shall be made over to the officer in charge of the nearest police station with least possible delay, together with a report of the circumstances occasioning the arrest’. A loophole has been created by the ‘least possible delay’, wherein no time frame is mentioned thereby creating an ever-increasing list of cases of disappearance.
The AFSPA was imposed in north eastern states of India (except Sikkim) and was later extended to Jammu & Kashmir as a counter insurgency law. It was passed by parliament without much debate and in spite of the objections of a few parliamentarians who were from the concerned regions. Since then, this law has continued in the same manner and this ‘counter insurgency’ strategy has not been changed or reviewed.
The law has resulted in extra-judicial killings, rapes, torture, disappearances and fake encounters with security forces. From the local public and organisations, to national and international organizations and individuals, many have come together to oppose this law. But because of section 6 of the AFSPA, which holds that no prosecution can be allowed against security personnel without prior permission from central government, the government has not allowed a single sanction for prosecution, despite several proven examples of human rights violations.
Irom Sharmila Chanu has been on a hunger-strike to repeal this law. The Manipur government lodged a case of “attempted suicide” when she started her strike in 2000. But in all case hearings, Irom Sharmila has always maintained that she does not want to commit suicide, instead she loves life and is fighting for people. She has re-iterated several times that, “I love my life but I want justice and peace”. Under section 309, the maximum punishment awarded is of up to one year and so every year, the court release and re-arrest her for the same case. During one such release, in 2006, Sharmila went to Delhi and offered a floral tribute on the memorial of Mahatma Gandhi, the father of the nation who also chose the path of hunger-strike during the colonial period. She then resumed her strike in Delhi.
The Manipur government has kept her prisoner in a security ward of Jawaharlal Nehru Hospital, Manipur, where she is force-fed through nasogastric intubation. She has not taken even a morsel or a drop of water through her mouth for 14 years. But still in these 14 years, the government has not taken any step to talk to her.
On August 19th 2014, the Imphal court ordered the release of Irom Sharmila on the grounds that there was “no supportive evidence for attempted suicide”. Sharmila was finally released, however, the government quickly registered a fresh case and re-arrested her after two days. During the arrest, she was dragged by security personnel and dumped in a jeep.
During her hearing at New Delhi in May, I had the opportunity to meet her. It was quite surprising and inspiring to see how she was so full of positivity and hope. In spite of suppression by the government, she expressed her hope for democracy. She never became irritated and did not say anything against the government.
I also met her during the court trial when the court was adjourned for lunch. It was revealed by the nurses who had accompanied her that Sharmila had been in court since the morning but, due to delay in court proceedings, it had not been possible to feed her through the nasal tube. The court was not bothered. I felt sad to see a lady who has not eaten for 14 years waiting for the court’s lunch break to end, but it had not bothered her. During the hearing, she again re-iterated that she loves her life and is not committing suicide. The court did nothing except give her the date for the next hearing.
This has been happening for 14 years in the ‘world’s largest democracy’. Irom continues to protest against the AFSPA, the AFSPA continues to violate human rights and the Government and judiciary continues to turn its back.
This post originally appeared on the student-led LSE Human Rights blog. It is reposted with permission.
About the Author
Ravi Nitesh is an India-based human rights activist. He is the founder of Mission Bhartiyam, an organisation working in the fields of peace & harmony, human rights and environment. He is a core member of Save Sharmila Solidarity Campaign, a nation-wide campaign in support of Irom Sharmila and the repeal of AFSPA.
Here all so called democratic parties ally to agree on continuation of AFSPA and expose themselves and that in the name of “National Security” which is blatant lie.
Prashant Bhushan opened his mouth on this issue in relation with Kashmir and was branded as his personal view by the AAP in fear of being levelled as anti national.
This is extremely sad for all progressive and revolutionary forces of this country where one of the huge section of this country is being treated as occupied territory!
I support Irom Sharmila and her greatest sacrifices for the people and demand repeal of AFSPA!
Farther to my previous comments a little clarification for students interested in the law. Sharmila’s detention for the previous fourteen years was illegal for several reasons. In India following the British system of Justice after a person is arrested they are either charged and brought to trial or released. In the UK the police have 48 hours to bring charges or release but this can be extended for a short period by applying to a magistrate. Similarly in India this can be extended by Judicial Remands to allow the police time to gather farther evidence. In cases where the maximum sentence on conviction is ten years of less (as in attempt to commit suicide) the maximum continuous judicial remand is 60 days (four repeated judicial remands). So every year after the first 60 days the remainder of her term of incarceration has been either kidnapping by the State or illegal detention. There is a clause under POTA whereby a suspected terrorist can be detained for up to 180 days in order for the police to gather evidence for prosecution but Sharmila has been accused of nothing more than attempt to suicide and even if the POTA exemption had been sought the remaining half year of each of the previous 14 years would still be illegal. Second in 2004 an additional isolation order was added by the then Principal Secretary Manipur in response to a letter from the DG Manipur Police (Prisons) in which the DG accepted he did not have the power to keep her in isolation but he’d really like to. The Principal Secretary didn’t have the power to authorise it but he signed the letter and no one challenged it. In February 2010 the then Chief Judicial Magistrate Imphal East HH Mr Roland Keishing advised Sharmila on looking into the matter that the illegal isolation order could be overturned if challenged in the High Court and if necessary the Supreme Court. He invited the Secretary of AMBA (All Manipur Bar Association) to represent Sharmila at the High Court. The gentleman accepted but later stated that he had promised nothing. It was only after the NHRC visit 23 October 2013 that they ruled the isolation order had no authority in Indian Law and that by following this policy of arbitrary solitary confinement it was clear that the State of Manipur was trying to break the spirit of a respected Indian Prisoner of Conscience through a regime of mental and emotional torture. NGOs conspired to keep Sharmila isolated being given the right to reward some with visits and prevent any real supporter from meeting with her. A final clarification the judgement of the District & Sessions court has been taken out of context in this second hand report. What the Judge said was that the Prosecution had not presented any evidence of Mens Rea, and so the long and detailed set of precedents brought by the defence arguing that a political hunger strike did not constitute actus reus for the charge of attempted suicide was moot and the Judge did not rule on it. I can provide a copy of the full judgement if any student wishes to read it. But what I have said my confuse many who aren’t that interested in the facts. The recent action was again a conspiracy to have Sharmila killed before the satyagraha can be completed successfully. The reason the prosecution did not present evidence was that it had been pre-agreed that they wanted Sharmila to be allowed to die in obscurity in the death tent prepared for her by NGOs. On the last occasions two film crews from NDTV and CNN IBN turned up at Imphal which is rare and the plan was deferred. Currently the GoM has reverted to Judicial remands on fresh charges of attempted suicide and they are bringing a judicial review via the High Court. At the last session of the High Court the Judge asked for more reports. As a trial is proceeding in Delhi for attempted suicide it is unlikely that the Manipur High Court will after 14 years of botched legalisms not allow a trial to proceed so that justice may be served. It is very unlikely even if a trial is allowed given the lack of independent counsel that justice will be served. If this response is not published within 48 hours I will appeal again as I did the last time. LSE does seem to follow procedures.
It would have been better if the author could have written more about his experiences personally after meeting with Irom Sharmila and what she said to him.
Thank you everyone for support. And yh, I will surely write about all my experiences of what she told to me.