Refusal to sanction prosecution untenable

The worst fears about the operation of the Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA) have again been confirmed by the government’s refusal to sanction prosecution of the worst excess committed by Army personnel under cover of the law in recent times. By refusing sanction for prosecution of 30 Army commandos who were allegedly responsible for the massacre of 13 civilians in Nagaland in December 2021, the Defence Ministry has sent out the message that it will continue to protect erring personnel in any circumstance. The killings at Oting village in Mon district were unprovoked and were the result of a bungled operation. Six workers returning from a coal mine were gunned down by the security forces. Seven more were killed when villagers protested against the killings. There was widespread outrage over the incident and multiple investigations were announced. The Indian Army promised suitable action against the guilty, irrespective of their rank.

A Special Investigation Team (SIT) was formed by the Nagaland government to probe the incident. It indicted 30 members of the Army unit involved in the operation and filed a chargesheet at the district and sessions court in Mon in May 2022. It had found that the Army personnel had violated the standard operating procedure and resorted to indiscriminate firing, killing people. The Army announced its own investigation and its results have not been made public. But the legal process has not moved forward because the Army personnel can be prosecuted only if there is sanction for it from the Defence Ministry. That sanction has been denied now and that seems to be the end of the matter. The result is that the personnel who have been found guilty of murder by a government-conducted investigation are likely to go scot-free.

There are many issues involved in the matter. The first is the failure of justice. The innocent people who were killed and their kin would be denied justice. Delivery of justice to citizens, especially those who are victims of highhanded actions by the powerful, is the duty of the State. In this case, the State itself is the perpetrator of injustice. The government, and the Army as an institution, have failed to honour the promise to punish the guilty. The failure to dispense justice even in such clear cases of excessive and unnecessary use of power would only alienate the people. The incident again shows the scope for misuse of the AFSPA and how it helps to entrench the sense of impunity among service personnel. Such a draconian law, which gives absolute powers to the armed forces without accountability, should have no place in a democratic system.