#dnaEdit: Tripura’s confidence

The Tripura Cabinet’s decision to revoke the draconian Armed Forces Special Powers Act in the state is a heartwarming development that reiterates our belief in peace trumping violence and the inherent potential of political processes to triumph over insurgencies. Tripura’s confidence is a lesson to Jammu and Kashmir(J&K), Nagaland, Manipur, Assam, and parts of Arunachal Pradesh and Meghalaya where AFSPA is still in effect. Tripura has managed to quell violence, not because of AFSPA, but thanks to the state government reaching out to its citizens in a manner that the dysfunctional political systems in these other states have failed to do. The AFSPA’s provisions allow security forces to search premises, stop vehicles, make arrests without warrants, use maximum force, and then offer them immense protection from civilian courts for acts committed in pursuance of their duties. This law has single-handedly turned many citizens against the Indian State for not assuring them the same protection of the law and access to justice that those in “peaceful” areas are entitled to. Despite elections and the presence of elected state governments, AFSPA has created a rule by martial law that most state governments have not been able to tide over, considering the leverage enjoyed by the Centre in states where the Army is deployed.

Tripura’s experience with AFSPA has been different from neighbouring Manipur or J&K. Instead of the Army, Tripura deployed central paramilitary and state police personnel for anti-insurgency operations. Chief Minister Manik Sarkar has personally led from the front organising peace marches and galvanising public support in far-flung insurgency pockets. DN Sahay, Tripura governor between 2003 and 2009 and an NDA appointee, has testified to how Sarkar personified the sincerity and commitment of the state towards developing all sections of society, especially tribals. Sarkar’s actions empowering the Tripura Tribal Areas Autonomous District Council (TTAADC) and gram panchayats have helped them function in a responsive manner to the developmental needs of the tribals. This cut off the support base for the National Liberation Front of Tripura and the All Tripura Tiger Force. Sarkar also ensured excellent coordination between the security forces and the political leadership and kept close watch for any human rights violations, which have been few in Tripura compared to the other states. It has also helped that India’s improved relations with Bangladesh have helped disrupt the safe havens of the insurgents in the Chittagong hill-tracts. 

Despite the protests led by an iconic activist like Irom Sharmila and several instances of documented violence and denial of justice, successive central governments, mindful of the armed forces’ sentiments and the impact this could have on anti-insurgency operations, have been wary of repealing or revoking AFSPA. The Supreme Court had also upheld the controversial AFSPA sections in 1997. Former home minister P Chidambaram has frequently criticised AFSPA but during the years he ministered to India’s internal security his regular refrain was to blame the Army for the inability to repeal AFSPA. This failure of our lawmakers to take responsibility for legislating has undermined their political credibility and any number of anti-AFSPA statements by out-of-power politicians like Chidambaram ring hollow today. In parts of J&K and the North-East where insurgent activity has declined, the onus is on the state government to empower the policing machinery and improve the administrative outreach. As Tripura has proven, states have to take ownership of their destinies. The imagination and the leadership to solve local problems may never come from status-quoist central leaderships.