Title: Another Good Piece from the Sentinel
This is yet another well considered piece of editorial. I just can't quite figure out why , or how, the Sentinel opinions go like a yo-yo, from the well considered to outright propaganda on behalf of the same India that makes "--complete mockery of the democratic rights" of its people.
 
Emphases mine,

cm



 A Fast with a Difference
At a time when violence has entered almost every facet of the average citizen's life and the nation as a whole has been desensitized, Irom Sharmila's fast has given new significance and meaning to the form of protest perfected by the father of the nation. Six years ago, after security forces in Manipur gunned down 10 persons near Imphal, Sharmila began her fast demanding the scrapping of the notorious Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act or AFSPA. The government has detained her on charges of attempting suicide and she has been force-fed all these years. The very fact that she succeeded in removing herself to Delhi and now continues her protest in the heart of the country's capital, has added a sort of mystique to the struggle being put up by this frail woman from Manipur against the might of the Indian state. By shifting the venue of her historic fast from 'remote' Imphal to the nation's capital, Sharmila has succeeded in taking the woes of the people of Manipur and the Northeast right up to the doors of those who are still under the misconception that the answer to the ills of the northeastern region lies primarily in abrogating the rights of the peripheral people and by arming the security forces with unlimited powers.
 Last week we had occasion to refer to Sharmila's fast in this column. We are writing about it once again because this is no ordinary fast, especially in a country when fasting as a form of protest has long since degenerated into a cheap gimmick. Irom Sharmila's fast has not only succeeded in once again galvanizing the people of Manipur in their fight against the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act and the blatant violations of human rights that have been committed by the security forces, but it has also raised certain fundamental questions about the character of the Indian nation-state and its equations with the small ethnic nationalities struggling for political space within (and sometimes outside) the Indian Union. The very fact that the Indian state has tried to bypass a fast by a woman for six years against one of its most autocratic and draconian measures shows the inherent contradiction between the democratic principles enshrined in our Constitution and the priorities of a centralized nation-state. It is indeed a pity that in these 60 years of freedom, there has been no concerted move on the part of successive governments to resolve what may be called the basic inconsistency between the conception of a modern nation-state and the pervasive reality of the polyethnic and multinational character of our country. Otherwise, New Delhi would not have reacted as it has done in all these years to the popular outrage against a piece of legislation which makes a complete mockery of the democratic rights of the average citizen.
 Apart from raising certain central issues about the character and functioning of the Indian nation-state, Irom Sharmila's fast has brought into focus the lack of transparency and accountability of the Central government. When Manipur witnessed unprecedented waves of popular protest against the AFSPA two years ago following the rape and murder in army custody of Thangjam Manorama, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, in a much delayed move to assuage the feelings of the Manipuri people, promised them that he would consider replacing the AFSPA with a "more humane law that will address both the concerns of national security and the rights of the citizens." As part of this promise, the Justice Jeevan Reddy Committee was set up to review the AFSPA and to recommend, if necessary, its replacement by a more humane Act. It is significant that in both the Prime Minister's assurance to the Apunba Lup delegation which met him towards the end of November 2004 and in defining the parameters of the Reddy Committee, there is a reference to a "more humane Act" which obviously means that the Centre has accepted the fact that the AFSPA is an inhuman Act and needs to be changed or replaced!
 Yet, it is more than a year now since the Reddy Committee submitted its report to the government and the UPA government does not have the courage even to throw open the report to public debate, not to speak of acting on the Committee's recommendations for a repeal of the AFSPA. If the Prime Minister of a country cannot renege his pledge to the people, then what can one expect but further alienation of the Northeast from 'mainstream' India? The Centre's refusal to act on the Jeevan Reddy Committee's findings not only reflects the inherent prejudices and coloured mindset that continue to guide New Delhi's approach towards this region, but, more importantly, it reveals the ever-increasing influence of the security forces on the decision-making process in relation to the Northeast. This was true even when this region was quite free of militant politics. One may recall that in response to the people's demand for a refinery in the State, Nehru wrote to the then Assam Governor Fazl Ali in June 1957 that the refinery could not be set up in Assam because the "military opinion was dead against it." Today, with the northeastern region having been turned into a fully militarized zone, it is but natural for the Prime Minister and his Cabinet to buckle under Army pressure when it comes to repealing draconian measures like the AFSPA. Thus, Sharmila's fast has highlighted some of the inherent contradictions of the Indian state. And all those who are concerned about the proper functioning of our democratic polity are indebted to her. Hers is a fast that is a narrative of the aberrations of Indian democracy.
_______________________________________________
assam mailing list
[email protected]
http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org

Reply via email to