Around 60 distinguished individuals from various walks of life have issued a statement protesting against a recent order of the Meghalaya High Court, directing the Central government to “consider the use of Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act, 1958, in the Garo Hills area.”
The statement signed by social activist Aruna Roy, Prashant Bhushan, Nikhil Dey, Teesta Setalvad among others said: “The said direction issued by the High Court of Meghalaya is in complete violation of the Constitutional arrangement of separation of powers. The power to notify an area as disturbed and extend application of the AFSPA lies exclusively with the executive, that is, the State or the Central government…In fact, the point of view of the Court that the prevailing circumstances in Garo Hills warrants imposition of the AFSPA is merely based on the lay impressions of the Bench — a view which is uninformed, extraneous and has no basis in law and betrays lack of application of mind. The methodology and logic employed by the court in arriving at these conclusions is alien to established contours of legal reasoning and judicial rigor.”
According to the eminent citizens, “The instant order severely damages the credibility of the High Court of Meghalaya as an independent arbiter of citizen’s democratic rights…In addition to misunderstanding its role in a democracy, we are also concerned that the High Court has chosen to advocate imposition of the AFSPA — a law whose democratic credentials are in serious doubt. The AFSPA is widely considered to be a legislative measure unique in its absolute disregard of the rights of the residents against unlawful exercise of coercive power. The law exposes people to wanton and reckless use of force by security forces as it grants them absolute power and authority to use force. Over the years, a consensus has emerged on the AFSPA being a security measure of colonial origin in that it is a distinctively regressive tool which sets up a military ecosystem where security forces act with impunity and whip up an environment of fear and terror in the hearts and minds of people living in these places. The use of the AFSPA as a substitute for routine policing and maintaining law and order is a dangerous development. It is one that a High Court should not condone, and certainly not perpetuate.”
They said: “In a conflict-ridden region, it takes many years of work to position the judiciary as an independent institution which is committed to enforcing Constitutional discipline on the State and protects people’s right to redress. Through this order, the Chief Justice of the High Court of Meghalaya, along with two accompanying justices, has sought to unilaterally subject Garo Hills to a law that will have devastating consequences to the life and liberty of persons living there. This blatant and unilateral order does not serve the democratic fibre of the region, rather it appears to be bringing in questions on the court’s commitment to the Constitutional ethos of the Indian republic.”
