news details |
|
|
| AFSPA dilution will "adversely" affect CI operations: Army Chief | | | Early Times Report
NEW DELHI, Apr 15:
New army chief, General V K Singh today said any dilution in the Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA) would adversely impinge on the counter-insurgency (CI) operations of security forces in Jammu and Kashmir and other troubled states of the country.
His statement came at a time when the government was mulling
amendments to AFSPA, designed to facilitate the conduct of CI operations against terrorists and anti-national elements, following reports of its misuse.
"Any dilution of the AFSPA will impinge adversely on the manner in which the armed forces operate," Singh said in an interview in the upcoming edition of 'Sainik Samachar', the Defence Ministry's official fortnightly.
"While operating against terrorists, insurgents and anti-national elements in constrained and trying circumstances, the armed forces
need requisite legal protection," he said, when asked for his opinion on AFSPA, which is in force in Jammu and Kashmir and some North Eastern states.
On reported misuse of AFSPA, Singh said adequate measures had been instituted at organisational and functional levels to ensure that
the powers entrusted through the Act "are not misused."
Following reports of misuse of AFSPA that gives wide powers to the
armed forces to shoot, arrest and search, the Home Ministry has
indicated that it was considering the recommendations of the Justice Jeevan Reddy Committee and Administrative Reforms Commission to make changes in the law.
Noting that the AFSPA was designed to facilitate CI operations against the terrorists and anti-national elements, he said its utility in carrying out counter-terrorist operations could not be disputed.
"However, great care is taken to ensure that the Act is not misused and strict action has been initiated against the offenders," he added.
Singh said both the Army and the government were well aware of
"excessive employment" of the armed forces in secondary roles such
as internal security and all efforts were being made to keep such
deployment "minimal" and for the shortest possible timeframe,
consistent with threats and national security interests.
He was asked to respond to suggestions that the Army's combat potential was affected due to deployment in secondary roles and had lowered the morale of the troops, apart from alienating the general public.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
