JOIN USIrom: the woman and the activist
Much has been talked about Irom Sharmila ending her 16-year fast. While few are applauding her decision, others perceive it as a betrayal, a victory for the Indian state and are worried about the future of the movement against the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act (AFSPA).
Irom was in her late 20s when she started her fast in November 2000 protesting against the “atrocities” by the armed forces under the controversial AFSPA. The 1958 law has been severely criticised as draconian, and provides complete impunity to the armed forces in initiating actions against suspected insurgents.
The powers granted by AFSPA have been subjected to serious abuse in Manipur, leading to extrajudicial killings, rape, torture and forced disappearances. Irom was particularly distressed by the “killing” of 10 civilians who were waiting for a bus in Malom, a town in Imphal Valley, on November 2, 2000, by personnel from the Assam Rifles. This event impelled her to embark on a journey to which she sacrificed the prime of her life. She emerged as a global icon of protest and became a symbol of the movement against AFSPA.
Despite the tremendous support from various quarters, the 16-year journey for Irom has been lonely. Soon after she started her fast, she was arrested on grounds of trying to “commit suicide” and was later sent to judicial custody.
She would be released and re-arrested every year since then. She has spent most of her time detained in the jail ward of a hospital in Manipur where she was force-fed through a tube in her nose. In many of her interviews during her detention, Irom spoke about her desire to lead a “normal” life.
What seems to have come as a shock to many in Manipur is not only Irom’s decision to end her fast, but her decision to contest elections and to get married. Radical outfits like Alliance for Socialist Unity Kangleipak have issued threats to Irom, asking her not to deviate from the cause. She has also been asked to refrain from marrying a “non-local” man. Irom is in a relationship with a Goan-British activist, who has been viewed by many as an “agent” of the “Indian state.”
Irom’s case raises certain significant questions regarding the relationship between activism and the activist. A social movement is not always individualised. But when an individual becomes the symbol of a movement, does the individual become bigger than the movement? Or is an individual merely a pawn in the larger necessity of a social movement? Can one person chart/ change the course of a social movement? What happens when the activist and the activism become indistinguishable?
Irom’s decision to end her fast displays as much a fierce and independent spirit as her decision to embark on the fast. Her decision cannot be and must not be perceived as a setback to the movement. Irom’s decision to enter active politics is a re-imagination of her engagement with the movement and her commitment to working tow-ards the repeal of AFSPA rema-ins unchanged. It’s not an act of defeat, but an act of courage.
India’s apathy
If anyone is defeated, it is the rhetoric of the state’s commitment to democracy and its people. Irom has exposed the apathy of the Indian state towards its own citizens, where a non-violent peaceful protester was locked up like an ordinary criminal. A country that idolises Mahatma Gandhi has failed Irom Chanu Sharmila.
Irom’s decision to end her fast comes close on the heels of a landmark judgement by the Supreme Court on July 8, where it declared that the army and paramilitary personnel cannot use “excessive and retaliatory force” in Manipur and asked for a detailed probe into such cases. The court had also asked the Centre, Manipur government and the National Human Rights Commission to submit a comprehensive report on “fake encounter” cases in the state. The time is certainly ripe for the civil society in Manipur and the rest of India to come together and galvanise the movement against AFSPA.
While breaking her fast, Irom said she is not a “goddess” but an ordinary person with ordinary desires. What, however, is extraordinary is her resilience, her courage and her indomitable spirit. What will be the future of Irom’s political ambitions remains to be seen, but her tremendous fight against AFSPA at great personal cost can never be undermined. Irom is not an image with a tube anymore, she is entering an active political life to take her cause forward.
Perhaps, her new innings as a political leader will inject a new lease of life into the movement against AFSPA and stir public-political conscience more effectively than her long fast. In the meantime, let us have the courage to accept Irom as an independent wo-man making choices about her own body and life.
(The writer is Assistant Dean (Student Initiative), and Assistant Director, Centre for Women, Law and Social Change, Jindal Global Law School, O.P. Jindal Global University, Sonipat, Haryana)