{"id":26319,"date":"2024-02-08T12:42:40","date_gmt":"2024-02-08T12:42:40","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/edukemy.com\/blog\/?p=26319"},"modified":"2024-02-08T12:42:44","modified_gmt":"2024-02-08T12:42:44","slug":"human-right-activists-constantly-highlight-the-fact-that-the-armed-forces-special-powers-act-1958-afspa-is-a-draconian-act-leading-to-cases-of-human-right-abuses-by-security-forces-what-sections","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/edukemy.com\/blog\/human-right-activists-constantly-highlight-the-fact-that-the-armed-forces-special-powers-act-1958-afspa-is-a-draconian-act-leading-to-cases-of-human-right-abuses-by-security-forces-what-sections\/","title":{"rendered":"Human right activists constantly highlight the fact that the Armed forces (Special Powers) Act, 1958 (AFSPA) is a draconian act leading to cases of human right abuses by security forces. What sections of AFSPA are opposed by the activists. Critically evaluate the requirement with reference to the view held by Apex Court. (250 Words 15 Marks)"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n
\"\"<\/a><\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n

The Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act, 1958 (AFSPA) stands as a contentious piece of legislation within the realm of human rights activism. Human rights activists fervently argue against AFSPA, emphasizing its draconian nature and its role in perpetuating instances of human rights violations by security forces. At the crux of their opposition lie several sections of AFSPA that grant sweeping powers to the armed forces, often at the expense of civilian rights. One particularly contentious provision is Section 4(a) of AFSPA, which empowers any commissioned officer, warrant officer, non-commissioned officer, or any other person of equivalent rank to fire upon or otherwise use force, even leading to death, against individuals acting in contravention of the law or order issued under this Act. This broad mandate, activists argue, enables excessive use of force and leads to extrajudicial killings, arbitrary detention, and other forms of abuse.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Moreover, Section 6 of AFSPA provides immunity to armed forces personnel from legal proceedings without the prior sanction of the central government. This immunity shield, according to critics, fosters a culture of impunity, where security personnel operate without fear of accountability for their actions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In evaluating the necessity of AFSPA, the perspective of the Apex Court holds considerable significance. While the Supreme Court of India has recognized the legitimate concerns regarding human rights abuses under AFSPA, it has also acknowledged the complex security situation in areas where the Act is enforced. The Court has emphasized the need for balance, advocating for measures to prevent abuse while acknowledging the security challenges faced by armed forces in conflict zones. However, the Court has also issued directives to ensure accountability and transparency in cases of alleged human rights violations under AFSPA, signaling the imperative for judicial oversight and adherence to constitutional principles even in areas marked by insurgency or unrest.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Tag: <\/strong>Challenges to internal security through communication network, role of media and social networking sites in internal security challenges. <\/strong>Security challenges and their management in border areas- linkages with organized crime with terrorism.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

\n