02.07.2007 - Source: South Asia Human Rights Documentation Centre

Report on India's Armed Forces Special Powers Act and the implicit chance to abuse and torture suspects with impunity in the future (" Masooda Parveen: Judicial Review of India’s Special Security Laws Goes from Bad to Worse [HRF/168/07]") [ID 20866]

Document(s): Open document

06.03.2007 - Source: US Department of State

Torture in Jammu & Kashmir ("Country Report on Human Rights Practices 2006") [ID 19112]

"In Jammu and Kashmir, torture victims or their relatives reportedly had difficulty filing complaints, as local police allegedly were instructed not to open a case without permission from higher authorities. In addition, under the Armed Forces (Jammu and Kashmir) Special Powers Act of 1990, no "prosecution, suit, or other legal proceeding shall be instituted against any person in respect of anything done or purported to be done in exercise of the powers of the act," without the approval of the central government. The act gives security forces the authority to shoot suspected lawbreakers and those disturbing the peace, and to destroy structures suspected of harboring violent separatists or containing weapons. Human rights organizations alleged that this provision allowed security forces to act with virtual impunity"

Document(s): Open document

06.03.2007 - Source: US Department of State

AFSPA ("Country Report on Human Rights Practices 2006") [ID 19199]

"The Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA) remained in effect in Nagaland, Manipur, Assam, and parts of Tripura, and a version of the law was in effect in Jammu and Kashmir. Under AFSPA, the government can declare any state or union territory a "disturbed area." This allows the security forces to fire on any person in order to "maintain law and order" and to arrest any person "against whom reasonable suspicion exists" without informing the detainee of the grounds for arrest. Security forces are also granted immunity from prosecution for acts committed under AFSPA.  In June 2005 a Home Ministry committee reviewed AFSPA and submitted its report and recommendations. On October 8, confirming years of press speculation, the Justice B.P. Jeevan Reddy Review Committee report was publicly released and recommended the repeal of the act and gave the central government power to send forces where required. The Jeevan committee recommended that inquires be allowed and offending soldiers not punished. The law provides a person in detention the right to a prompt trial; however, due to a severe backlog, this was not the case in practice. Human rights organizations reported that 60 to 75 percent of all detainees were in jail awaiting trial, drastically contributing to overcrowding. Human rights organizations asserted that approximately 65 percent of those detained were found innocent. Due to persistent inefficiencies in the judicial system, there were numerous instances in which detainees spent more time in jail under pretrial detention than they would have if found guilty and sentenced to the longest possible term. "

Document(s): Open document

06.03.2007 - Source: US Department of State

AFSPA and Disturbed Areas Act remained in effect in Jammu and Kashmir ("Country Report on Human Rights Practices 2006") [ID 19748]

"The AFSPA and the Disturbed Areas Act remained in effect in the Jammu and Kashmir districts of Kathua, Udhampur, Poonch, Rajouri, Doda, Srinagar, Budgam, Anantnag, Pulwama, Baramulla, and Kupwara, where active and violent secessionist movements existed. The Disturbed Areas Act gives police extraordinary powers of arrest and detention, and the AFSPA provides search and arrest powers without warrants (see section 1.d.). Human rights groups alleged that security forces operated with virtual impunity in areas under the act. In January a committee headed by Supreme Court Justice Jeevan Reddy recommended the act be scrapped because the government had authority under UAPA to combat the insurgency in the northeast. At year's end, the act remained in force.  "

Document(s): Open document

19.12.2006 - Source: World Organisation Against Torture

Deterioration of the state of health of Ms. Irom Sharmila Chanu who is in hunger strike to protest against the 1958 Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA) ("Deterioration of the state of health of Ms. Irom Sharmila Chanu [IND 003 / 1206 / OBS 151]") [ID 18610]

Document(s): Open document

18.12.2006 - Source: Amnesty International

AI deeply concerned that government may seek to retain provisions of Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act 1958 that contravene international human rights obligations and that continue to pose grave threats to human rights ("Amnesty International renews its call for an unconditional repeal of the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act, 1958 [ASA 20/034/2006]") [ID 18118]

Document(s): Open document

23.05.2006 - Source: Amnesty International

Annual Report 2006 ("Annual Report 2006") [ID 17250]

"More than a year after the repeal of the Prevention of Terrorism Act (POTA), cases of all those held under the Act had not been fully reviewed within the stipulated period. In addition, a number of state governments had not taken action on the recommendations of a judicial committee set up to review the cases. Human rights organizations continued to express concern over amendments made to the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act which granted special powers to the state, similar to those previously provided by the POTA. Although the 1958 Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA) was under review, there was concern over its continued enforcement in “disturbed areas”, including large parts of the north-east. Syed Geelani, a Kashmiri lecturer sentenced to death under the POTA for conspiring, planning and abetting the attack on the parliament building in New Delhi in December 2001 and acquitted on appeal in 2003, was shot and injured in February outside his lawyer’s office. The inquiry into the shooting was entrusted to the very police force that Syed Geelani alleged had harassed him since his release. An appeal filed by police against his acquittal was dismissed by the Supreme Court in September."

Document(s): Open document

08.2005 - Source: Freedom House

Annual survey of political rights and civil liberties 2004 ("Freedom in the World 2005") [#41316],  [ID 6304]

"[...]The Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA) and the Disturbed Areas Act remain in effect in several states, and these grant security forces broad powers of arrest and detention. Security forces also continued to detain suspects under the broadly drawn National Security Act, which authorizes detention without charge for up to one year. The criminal procedure code requires the central or state governments to approve prosecution of security force members, which is rarely granted. As a result, impunity for security forces implicated in past human rights abuses remains a concern. After the alleged custodial rape and killing of civilian Thangjam Manorama in July, antigovernment protests erupted in the northeastern state of Manipur, with protestors demanding that the AFSPA be lifted.[...]"

Document(s): Open document

25.05.2005 - Source: Amnesty International

The Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA) remained in force in “disturbed areas” ("Annual Report 2005") [#32264],  [ID 6305]

"[...]The 1958 Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA) remained in force in “disturbed areas” including large parts of the north-east. A number of provisions of the AFSPA breached international standards. For example, the Act empowered the security forces to arrest people without a warrant and to shoot to kill in circumstances where their lives were not in danger. It also granted members of the armed forces immunity from prosecution for acts carried out under its jurisdiction. [...]"

Document(s): Open document
Open document

09.05.2005 - Source: Amnesty International

Jammu, Kashmir, Northeast: Report focused on human rights abuses committed by security forces and facilitated by Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act ("Briefing on the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act, 1958") [#31879],  [ID 6306]

Document(s): Open document

03.11.2004 - Source: Asian Centre for Human Rights

North East India: Background article on the Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA) ("Review of AFSPA: Too Little, Too Late") [#27781],  [ID 6307]

Document(s): Open document
Open document

10.2004 - Source: UK Home Office

AFSPA ("Country Report - October 2004") [#28325],  [ID 6308]

"[...]
5.29 As stated in the same report, “The Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA) of 1958 remained in effect in Nagaland, Manipur, Assam and parts of Tripura, and a version of this law was in effect in Jammu and Kashmir. Under this Act, the Government has the power to declare any State or Union Territory a ‘disturbed area’, allows security forces to fire on any person if it is considered "necessary for maintenance of law and order;" the authorities can arrest any person "against whom reasonable suspicion exists" with no obligation to inform the detainee of the grounds for arrest; and the authorities are given immunity from prosecution for any acts committed by them in relation to the Act.” [2c](p10-11)

5.30 BBC news reported on 5 August 2004 that thousands of protesters in Manipur campaigned to demand the withdrawal of the Act after a Manipuri woman was found raped and shot by the security forces, however the latter say they need the special powers to fight the separatists. [32dc] Amnesty International made a public statement on 11 August 2004 and called for a review of the Act. "In areas declared as "disturbed" -- such as in the north-east region -- Amnesty International is concerned that the AFSPA:
• facilitates grave human rights violations,
• empowers the security forces to arrest and enter property without warrant,
• gives the security forces powers to use excessive force, including to shoot to kill without members of the security force lives being at imminent risk,
• facilitates impunity because no person can start legal action against any member of the armed forces for anything done under the Act without permission of the Central Government,
• by certain of its provisions violates articles of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR)…"[3j]
[...]

6.231 As noted in the USSD 2003, “The Armed Forces (Jammu and Kashmir) special Powers Act of 1990 provides that unless approval is obtained from the central Government, no “prosecution, suit, or other legal proceeding shall be instituted…against any person in respect of anything done or purported to be done in exercise of the powers of the act.” This provision allowed the security forces to act with virtual impunity.”[2c](p9) [...]"

Document(s): Open document

09.09.2004 - Source: Asian Centre for Human Rights

Analysis of the Armed Forces Special Powers Act, 1958 ("Repeal or Review: An analysis of the draconian Armed Forces Special Powers Act, 1958") [#25939],  [ID 6309]

Document(s): Open document

10.08.2004 - Source: BBC News

The new Congress-led government to scrap the Armed Forces Special Powers Act enacted by the previous government ("India anti-terror law to be axed") [#24651],  [ID 6310]

Document(s): Open document