Defence & SecurityImportant2025-10-01

AFSPA Extended in Northeast States

Q: Which of the following statements is/are correct regarding the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act (AFSPA)? 1. The Jeevan Reddy Committee (2005) recommended the complete repeal of AFSPA. 2. Under Section 3 of the Act, an area can be declared 'disturbed' only by the Central Government, and not by the Governor of the State.

1 only — Statement 1 is correct; the Justice Jeevan Reddy Committee recommended the repeal of AFSPA and the incorporation of its essential provisions into the UAPA. Statement 2 is incorrect; Section 3 of AFSPA empowers both the Central Government and the Governor of the State to declare an area as 'disturbed'.

In News

What Happened

On October 1, 2025, the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) extended the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act (AFSPA), 1958, for another six months in designated parts of Manipur, Nagaland, and Arunachal Pradesh. This declaration maintains these regions as 'disturbed areas'. The extension continues to grant security forces sweeping operational powers, including the ability to arrest without a warrant and immunity from prosecution.

Why It Matters

This extension highlights the persistent internal security challenges and insurgency threats in India's Northeast region. It demonstrates the ongoing struggle to balance the operational requirements of security forces with the protection of human rights and civil liberties of the local population.

Background

History & Context

AFSPA was enacted in 1958 to tackle armed insurgency in the Naga Hills and was later extended to other Northeast states. Over the years, civil society groups have heavily criticized the act for alleged human rights violations. In 2005, the Justice Jeevan Reddy Committee reviewed the act and explicitly recommended its repeal, suggesting that its necessary provisions be incorporated into the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA). Despite these recommendations, successive governments have periodically extended it in regions deemed 'disturbed' under Section 3 of the Act.

What Changed

▶
BEFORE: The AFSPA notification for specific districts in Manipur, Nagaland, and Arunachal Pradesh was set to expire at the end of September 2025. NOW: The MHA extended the 'disturbed area' notification for another six months, effectively continuing the status quo from October 1, 2025.
▶
BEFORE: Over recent years, there was a steady policy trend of gradually withdrawing AFSPA from various Northeast districts as security improved. NOW: The extension in these specific pockets indicates that the government views the internal security situation in these areas as still too fragile to lift the act.
▶
BEFORE: Without AFSPA, armed forces operating in civilian areas are subject to standard criminal procedure codes. NOW: By maintaining the AFSPA status, security personnel operating in these specific districts retain extraordinary legal protections, including immunity from civilian prosecution without prior approval from the Central Government.

Prelims Angle

NCERT Connection

This event directly connects to Class 12 Political Science Chapter 8 - 'Regional Aspirations'. The chapter explores how historical neglect, insurgency, and demands for autonomy in the Northeast led to strong state responses like AFSPA, illustrating the ongoing tension between national security imperatives and regional democratic rights.

Practice Questions

Q1

Correct Statement(s)

Which of the following statements is/are correct regarding the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act (AFSPA)? 1. The Jeevan Reddy Committee (2005) recommended the complete repeal of AFSPA. 2. Under Section 3 of the Act, an area can be declared 'disturbed' only by the Central Government, and not by the Governor of the State.

Up next