Hunger Strike for Peace

Irom Chanu Sharmila, is an Indian activist on a hunger strike for peace. Now this is not as simple as it sounds. Eleven years ago on November 2, 2000 Sharmila started her hunger strike. On this day in a village called Malom, an unknown explosion happened on the streets leading into the village. This sent the soldiers of the Assam Rifles surging into the village. The soldiers killed ten people including a 62-year old and teenagers claiming that they were shooting against them. However, after investigation there was no evidence that the victims fired against the soldiers. The soldiers lined seven of the victims up at a bus stop and opened fire on them in close range, the rest were executed in other parts of the village.

Two days after this event, Sharmila sat along a major road with a sign labeled "Hunger Strike" displayed in front of her. Her main goal was to have the government overturn the "Armed Forces Special Powers Act" of 1958 (Polgreen 2). This would then lead to the arrest of the men who murdered villagers in Malom. Under this act, the military is authorized to arrest people without a warrant and use lethal measures to dismantle groups with five or more people. Sharmila was arrested shortly after setting up alongside of the road because in India attempting suicide is a violation of the law. Following her arrest she has been force-fed in a hospital room; visiting a courtroom every 15 days to proclaim she is continuing on with her hunger strike. She has no desire to stop her strike until justice is reached.

There are a few international human rights issues addressed in this article, but I would like to focus on the Armed Forces Special Powers Act of 1958. Under this act the military is allowed to arrest someone without a warrant because they are suspicious of a citizen. This part of the act violates protection against arbitrary arrest or detention. A citizen being "suspicious" is not a just reason to be able to arrest them. The other main part of this act is for the military to be able to fire against groups of five or more people or those wit deadly weapons. Now I understand the military would be able to use force against a group that possess deadly weapons and is threatening the safety of the military officers. However, I find it unnecessary to be able to use deadly force against a group of five or more people that possess no threat. This section of the act goes against the human right of liberty and security of a person. If a citizen is in a group of 5 people he/she is ultimately no granted any type of security.

When is it acceptable for the military to arrest someone without a warrant and to use violent force against a group of 5 or more people?