AIPPM- Background Guide

P I M U N 2 0 1 6

Polaris International

Model United

Nations 2016

Polaris Solutions Enterprise

proudly present the first session of:

Background Guide

AIPPM

21st 22nd and 23rd of April 2016

PIMUN 2016 AIPPM Pg. 2

From the Desk of the Chairs

Honourable Members of Parliament,

Greetings and welcome to the All India Political Parties' Meet convened in the first session of

Polaris International Model United Nations. The prospect of being involved in the process of

deciding the fate of approximately 1.21 billion people (and counting), is ironically daunting as

well as exciting. This prospect is, as any democracy demands, decided in a Parliament of the

People. But to be a part of a conclave of people, the conclusion of which frames the minds of

those who decide the fate mentioned above, brings about prospects which soar high above

'daunting' or 'exciting'. And Honourable Members, that is exactly what you have enrolled

yourself into.I cannot stress enough the humungous challenge of responsibility which falls upon your

shoulders. The debate you conduct in the chamber will have an effect on the positions taken by a

Parliament of 790 members, and by extension of the whole population of the country and those

dependent on the same outside its domestic borders. Considering the above, the delegates will be

expected to, first and foremost, be completely aware about the agenda for the Meet. However, a

narrow channel of knowledge limiting the awareness simply to the sections of the agenda would

be tantamount to committing political suicide in the committee, to sugar coat it. In these cases,

newspapers or news blogs tend to the best ally one has, considering their legitimacy. Such should

be the commitment to reach a proper resolution to the agenda that the passion of the Members

becomes evident through substance and tenor of debate. Debate, the delegates must understand

and accept, is the most important element in the proceedings in order to reach a politically

acceptable solution. However, it is not the only medium of communication. The Honourable

Members may resort to communicating via chits. It must be ensured that the chits are passed via

the EB, to bring to our attention your efforts and contributions to reach a conclusion. Considering that different applicants will be allotted different Members of Parliament sitting in

the current Lok and Rajya Sabha, you must behave in a manner similar to them. Admitted, the

behaviour in the two houses cannot, in its entirety, be termed model, but one must learn the

witticism, sarcasm and other interesting figures of speech employed by them, which makes the

longest of speeches comprising of only facts and figures, the most brilliant arguments and

political jabs. You must inculcate in yourself that art of public speaking which can sway masses

to favour your motion or opinion. It is as a guarantee that I state, that all participants in this committee will have the time of their

lives considering the slight leniency which will be allowed considering the nature of the

committee. However, the respect that the Agenda, EB and your own position demands, must be,

under all circumstances, submitted to. Punctuality in the submission of Position Papers and

attendance will be rewarded in a manner deemed appropriate for the same. You must keep in

mind that your conduct outside the committee, even when we are not in session, for a politician is

under watch at all t imes and the same will be my criteria for judgement.

Looking forward to meet you in person,Kahaan Mehta.


The prospective torch bearers of tomorrow,

Greetings!

As you might have duly noted the distinctive convenience our revered chair has bestowed by conveying the rudimentary technicalities, allow my epistle to be void of it. On the very onset, congratulations for opting to be a part of this conclave; not because it is a provenance of conceit, but as a token of appreciation for your willingness to deliberate on the issues that concerns our country today. By doing so, you have scaled a preliminary stride forward in discerning yourself as a responsible citizen of the country.

As it might be cognizant to you by now that the agenda that we are contemplating happens to be an objective paradigm that has been the root to innumerable episodes – both disconsolate and providential – of the region which most of us have had the privilege to refer to as a 'home'. However, this pristine region, rich in ethos and resources, of all had to be disrupted by the dastardly act of insurgency way back during the 50s. Over the years, terrorism and secessionism contrived an ignominious interlude which acted as a vacuum which engulfed an entire generation. And when the resilient governmental machineries and armed forces tried to retaliate with force, it resulted in a clash which agonised those who had never seen a gun. And consequentially, our cultural and ideological differences which had first divided us into a more venerable umbrella of 'seven sisters' from a single amalgamation, was sequestered by the plight insurgency had inflicted proportionally on us. And, now that we shall deliberate on one such aspect of this issue, it is inherently conducive to expect us to be poised with a new aura of cognition at the conclusion of this conference.

Although your personal views on the agenda is a matter of subjectivity, do be wary of the fact that you are expected to be representing a politically proactive personality. However, it is also crucial to not let the gist of the debate be ostentatious in nature. At the end of the day, neither are we the real political brasses, nor is our decision in the committee going to affect their workflows. However, it is the about the experience and knowledge that one gathers form a conclave of this sort. It's about sharpening our oratory and elocutionary prowesses and refining our ideologies. Hence, honourable delegates, it is rather conscionable to draw a line between delegating and emulating; being imbued and being pretentious.

It is also discernible that politics in India has a unique aura of its own and its quirky nature of going about its business. However, so often it is that we see the decision-makers indulging themselves in obscenities and untoward acts, putting not only themselves but the entire nation to discomfiture. Therefore, while inculcating their imbuing ideals, remember to avert substances of obscenities and profanities. To say the least, it is fine to be sarcastic, but demeaning to be disparaging; understandable to be sanguine, but coercive to exert austerities; great to be diplomatic, but unproductive to not be vocal. But that said, I reckon you people are mature and prudential enough to judge for your own.

Looking forward to getting acquainted,

Regards, Dikshit Sarma Bhagabati


About the Committee

The All India Political Parties' Meet, popularly abbreviated as AIPPM, is the premier conclave of the stakeholders in the political scenario of a country. All India Political Parties' Meet, in simplified terms, is a meeting between all the political parties of the nation (India in this case); typically convened before the sessions of the parliament, although not compulsorily, or before the introduction of a bill, with the explicit intention to form a consensual understanding between different political parties in pertinence to volatile issues facilitating polarization thereof. Initially, such symposiums were primarily aimed to prevent wastage of floor time during the sessions of the Parliament-however, now they've enhanced their functioning as to provide a synoptic insight into the issues of the nation and provide a vibrant vantage-point before the commencement of the actual lawmaking procedure. The committee generally includes participants from political parties though the moderators can invite certain other belligerents with a non-political affiliation. The main objectives of the AIPPM, in no particular order, are:

1. To debate and discuss those matters of public importance which did not, in the opinion of the conveners, get the sufficient time that it should have. Some argue that to have a Parliament and yet convene such a meet is ironical, but few realise that the mandate of the Parliament in which we take so much pride has its own cons, as in this case, where the democratically elected parties feel that the floor of the Parliament is not enough (and they are within their rights to do so);

2. To solve extremely urgent problems or national stability or security almost instantly, which would otherwise take too much time in the Parliament thus making the decision-making process a slow one, and resulting in expenses of time, money, peace and security and in some cases, the people;

3. To solve party disputes;

4. To reach consensus on certain matters causing, otherwise avoidable problems, in the Parliament resulting in the functioning of the House.

Even though this body has no legislative powers, it plays a vital role in determining the position and tone of those whose votes make, change or break a law.

One would notice that in a Parliament, an elected member, whichever the party may be, speaks for the residents of the constituency which she or he may represent thus giving them a lee-way to divert from their parties' opinion on certain matters (though completely speaking up against the party could be considered tantamount to suicide bombing). In this conclave, however, the representatives make clear the parties' stand on a particular issue/ a set of issues. Thus, what essentially happens is a war of political ideologies without too many constraints.


Thus delegates, this committee will demand not only formal but informal inter-party dialogues to take place off the record. It may require you to compromise on certain matters, but please ensure that you do not violate your party's policy in any minute form. We would advise that you be well versed with the parties' ideologies (usually found on their websites), their manifestoes, political speeches, press releases and so on.

It is of utmost imperativeness for the delegates to register the fact that the committee is deemed to inculcate the technicalities and functions of the Indian political paradigm, and accordingly comply it with idealistic notions thereof, in order to act as an avuncular reference. Therefore, it is expected from the delegates to not indulge in certain ignominious activities while contemplating the agenda, and also not to be emphatically sanguine and sequestrate parliamentary form of communication.


Mandate of the Committee:

The Mandate of the Conclave will remain similar to the document on the same provided for the conference headed “Rules of Procedure” except on the following matters:

1. Considering that this is a supplementary body to the Parliament, both Hindi and English will be allowed during the formal and informal sessions of the committee.

2. Delegates may use the first person in their speeches and must address other members of the conclave as “The Honourable Member, Mr./Mrs./Ms. _____________” or simply as “The Honourable Member”. It is advisable to address Cabinet Ministers by the position they hold in their Ministry rather than their first or last names.

3. The Committee will have members of various Political Parties. Their presence in the conclave will be calculates on the basis of the number of seats won by them in the Parliament.

rd4. A quorum of 2/3 is compulsory for the party to pass a resolution on the Agenda.

5. The Agenda of the House will be moved by the convener of the AIPPM and will be adopted after a vote is taken on the same.

6. Primarily, the submissions of the House will be taken in by voice-votes on all matters. However, if such a process is inconclusive, the conclave will resort to division.

7. Speeches must not in any form be seditious.

8. Defamation is strictly prohibited. The decision on this matter, should an Honourable Member be accused of defaming another, will rest on the Chair/Vice Chair and will be binding.

Abiding by these procedures forms a crucial part of a Delegate's assessment.


The Armed Forces Special Powers Act.

Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act, 1958 has established itself as one of the most controversial constitutional provisions in the history of the nation. This dubious act promulgates from the Armed Forces Special Powers Ordinance, 1942, passed by the British government to suppress the Quit India Movement. The act, with its revamped intent, seeks to control rebellions, uprisings and insurgency in the disturbed areas, with respect to the provisions outlined by the Article 33 and Article 34 of the Indian constitution. That said, the act, which bestows formidable amount of powers in the hands of the armed forces, blatantly violates certain fundamental rights and commitments such as 'right to life and personal liberty (article 21)' and the spirit of the habeas corpus writ as upheld by the article 32. However, the implementation of this act has been successful in curbing militancy and internal aggressions (up to a certain extent) in Punjab and the North Eastern states. Considering the circumstances, the same cannot be affirmed with respect to J&K.

Nevertheless, infested with repeated human rights violations and exploitation of the legal provisions, the efficiency of the armed forces in the upkeep of this legal provision is rightfully undermined by the masses. So far, three commissions have been appointed in pertinence to determine constitutionality of this act. The Jeevan Reddy Commission, 2005, suggested abrogating or revoking the act and replacing it with other existent provisions in the constitution. The most recent commission, Abhay Hedge commission sought to shed light on the fake encounters and human rights abuses facilitated under the pretentious aegis of this act. It is imperative for the delegates to contemplate on the prospects and the requirements of this act and deliberate upon the instances it had set for itself in the past.

India presented its second report in pertinence to AFSPA to the United Nations Human Rights Council in 1991, which opened the prospect for an international moderation on it. According to verbatim records of the speeches, members had explicitly questioned the constitutionality of the law under the Indian legal system, its consistency with the provisions of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), and its speculative profane nature to moral conscience. It would be imperative for the members of AIPPM to reconcile and channelize their views towards the suggestions of the International Organizations and NGOs/NPOs.


The central government accordingly set up a five-member committee under the Chairmanship of Justice B P Jeevan Reddy, former judge of the Supreme Court. The panel was given the mandate of reviewing the provisions of AFSPA and advising the Government of India whether

(a) To amend the provisions of the Act to bring them in consonance with the obligations of the government towards protection of human rights; or

(b) To replace the Act by a more humane Act.

The Reddy committee submitted its recommendations on June 6, 2005. However, the government failed to take any concrete action on the recommendations even after almost a year and a half. The then Defence Minister Pranab Mukherjee had rejected the withdrawal or significant dilution of the Act on the grounds that “it is not possible for the armed forces to function” in “disturbed areas” without such powers. Even though AFSPA is applicable to various parts of the country, the committee must stick to discuss the same with specific emphasis on Manipur and Kashmir, since these regions are cannot be left without the armed forces for the sake of national security if nothing else, but face the most grievous problems because of the troops sent to protect them.


AFSPA and Jammu and Kashmir:

The Armed Forces (Jammu and Kashmir) Special Powers Act was passed by the Indian Parliament in 1990. This Act of Parliament gives the Armed Forces stationed in the above mentioned disturbed area to shoot to kill or destroy property on mere suspicion. “A non-commissioned officer or anyone of equivalent rank and above may use force based on opinion and suspicion, to arrest without warrant, or to kill. He can fire at anyone carrying anything that may be used as a weapon, with only “such due warning as may be considered necessary”. Once AFSPA is implemented, “no prosecution… shall be instituted except with the previous sanction of the central government, in respect of anything done or purported to be done” under this Act.

The implementation of AFSPA in Jammu and Kashmir is far more controversial than expected. On one hand, constant infiltration into sovereign Indian territory of Pakistan and it's military/civilian personnel cannot be avoided since it results and political and social instability and may be considered tantamount to preventing the prevention of a terrorist attack especially when there exists particular knowledge about the polarised opinion of the State and it's bordering neighbour. On the other hand, giving such extensive power to the military often results in violation of the most basic human right, it being the Right to Live. Often it so happens, that ordinary civilians are tortured or killed out of mere suspicions and are later filed into the legal system as “encounters”. Absolute power in the hands of the military has resulted in violation of several rights of the civilians. There also exist factions of the populace which consider the complete revocation of this Act, stressing the interestedness of the military in it's 'operations' and the “prolonged peace” in the area.

thReverting to legal matters, this Act was brought into effect from the 5 of July 1990; after both the Houses of Parliaments passed the Bill and it received the Presidential Assent. However, another Act of Parliament, titled the Disturbed Areas Act, 1992. This piece of legislation gives the State the power to declare the State of Jammu and Kashmir as a disturbed area thus giving autonomous powers to the military. Section 3 of the AFSPA, 1990 is reiterated in the DDA of 1992. It is claimed that Section 3 does not have a legal notification stating that AFSPA can be implemented in Jammu and Kashmir for more than a decade as it does now. The implementation of the Disturbed Areas Act would ratify the same and allow Jammu and Kashmir to continue to be treated as an instable region. However, the DDA lapsed in 1998 since it was not ratified in the same year by the Abdullah Government. Thus, it is argued that the implementation of AFSPA in the said region is nothing short of illegal, argues senior PDP leader and constitutional lawyer, Muzzafar Hussain Baig.


The recent alliance of the BJP and the PDP to form the Kashmiri Government brings an interesting light to the whole matter considering the fact that the BJP, which had once released a strong statement regarding their stance against the revocation of ASPA, now appears to concede to the demand made against it by Mufti's PDP.

The Delegates must pay close attention to the History of Jammu and Kashmir, the problem faced by the citizens as well as the Government, the general feeling about AFSPA, party statements at the Central and the State level, the alleged atrocities of the Army and all Acts and Bills associated with this part of the Agenda.


AFSPA in Manipur

Manipur has discernibly faced a wide plethora of disconsolate episodes due to AFSPA. Manipur, or for that matter the six other entities of the seven sisters which then were amalgamated with the state of Assam, were immediately brought under the jurisdiction of this act once it was ratified, following its approval by the

thlegislation on the 11 of September 1958.

The imposition of this act finds its causes back to the debacles in 1951. In 1951, the Naga National Council (NNC) claimed to have conducted a "free and fair plebiscite" in which about 99 % of the Nagas voted for a 'Free Sovereign Naga Nation', laying the provenance of secessionist instincts which would later be an integral cause of agonising insurgency for the region. Consequentially, this conduced a boycott of first general elections of 1952- which later, extended into the mass

boycott of government institutions and officials. In order to deal with the situation, the Assam government imposed the Assam Maintenance of Public Order (Autonomous District) Act in the Naga Hills in 1953 and contrived intensive police action against the rebels. When the situation worsened, The MoHA with warranted recommendations from the state govt., deployed the Assam Rifles in the Naga Hills and enacted the Assam Disturbed Areas Act of 1955, providing a legal framework for the paramilitary forces and the armed state police to combat insurgency in the region and facilitate necessary measures to consequentially pacify the same. However, the Assam Rifles and the state armed police could not contain the Naga rebellion and the rebel Naga Nationalist Council (NNC) formed a parallel government, 'The Federal Government of Nagaland', on 23 March 1956. The Armed

Forces Special Powers Ordinance, 1 9 5 8 w a s p r o m u l g a t e d b y President Dr. Rajendra Prasad on 22 May 1958. It was replaced by the revamped Armed Forces special Powers Act, 1958 on 11 September 1958.


This act has been a cause of exasperation and protests in the region. Following innumerable cases of Human Rights abuses facilitated by the exploitation of this act and the delusive interpretation of its intent, Manipur has witnessed mass protests against i t . One of the most noteworthy saga of dissent with regards to this act has to be the exemplary chronicle of Irom Chanu Sharmila; the lady who has been on a hunger strike for more than one decade and a half. Her s t r u g g l e q u i n t e s s e n t i a l l y epitomises the plight of Manipur is, or for that matter anyone else, who has succumbed to the darker facets of the act.


United Nations Human Rights Council's Report

Given below is an excerpt from the report submitted to the UNHRC in 2013:

While India is to be commended for several positive aspects in its human rights record, there is reason for serious concern, specifically about extrajudicial executions. The main patterns of unlawful killings in India at present involve, inter alia, killings resulting from various instances of excessive use of force by the security forces, those occurring in the context of attacks by various armed groups, and killings of vulnerable persons. 92. Impunity is the central problem. The obstacles to accountability, especially the need for prior sanction of prosecutions of civil servants, should be removed. 93. To a large extent, the required structures to decrease extrajudicial executions are already in place. The steps to be taken have also largely been identified within the system. A concerted and systematic effort is required by the State, civil society and others concerned to eradicate the occurrence of unlawful killings. In this process, some best practices that are already followed in the country should be used as models for reform elsewhere. 94. There is a strong need for victims to speak about their experiences. A credible national process under the form of transformative justice is called for. Justice for victims, accountability and punishment of the perpetrators are essential elements of such a process. Specific attention should be given to the following issues: (a) challenging the general culture of impunity; (b) addressing the practice of “fake encounters” to ensure that it is eliminated; and (c) ensuring swift, decisive action, with concrete outcomes, is taken in cases of large-scale killings. 95. A public commitment to the eradication of the phenomenon of unlawful killings is needed.


Conclusion:

Notwithstanding the imposition of this act, the north eastern region is yet to witness the dawn of renaissance from insurgency. Following is a synoptic moderation regarding its status quo:

NAGALAND: On the brink of renaissance.

AFSPA was enacted in Nagaland in 1958, before its bifurcation from Assam in December 1961. AFSPA came in the contextual paradigm of the Naga rebellion (refer to 'AFSPA in Manipur' Section for details) in what was then the Naga Hills district of Assam — and has refused to leave more than 50 years after the new state was created, thanks to continued insurgencies by multiple rebel groups. But the situation has changed dramatically since the NSCN(IM) — longest operating insurgency outfit in the country, until it signed the peace accord in 2015 — began peace talks over 14 years ago culminating to its formalized consequences in 2015. However, The Khaplang fraction of the same (the same outfit which carried out an ambush on the army convoy in Chandel district, in 2015) is still under operation. Most of civil society and humanitarian groups and organizations in Nagaland are now opposed to the continuation of AFSPA.


MANIPUR: For another state's insurgency, but their own plight.

In Manipur, where the clamour for the repeal of AFPSA has been loudest and the most discernable — with Irom Sharmila on a hunger-strike since December 2000 — the government, on August 12, 2004, withdrew the Act in seven assembly constituencies comprising the Imphal municipal area. And yet, there have been several instances of the state police force being involved in brutal extra-judicial killings of civilians, including a pregnant woman, in the capital. The Congress in 2012 campaigned to abrogate AFSPA if voted back to power. It's still in the Assembly, and so is AFSPA in the state.

ASSAM: Insurgency and AFSPA, a disproportionate saga. Assam was the first state to have the AFSPA imposed on it in 1958. The Act returned to present-day Assam on November 27, 1990, when the state was declared a 'Disturbed Area' in the wake of largescale violence by the ULFA. AFSPA has been in force without a break ever since, except in the Guwahati municipal area, from where it was lifted about a decade ago. In November 2014, the union Home Ministry extended the application of AFSPA in Assam for one more year in consideration of 'violent incidents caused by the underground outfits', namely ULFA(I), NDFB(S) and the border areas of the state of Assam by underground outfits like GNLA, KPLT, UALA, ULFA (I), NDFB(S), NSCN (IM) and NSCN (K)”.

MEGHALAYA: Volatile border and pacified highlands.

AFSPA is not in force in Meghalaya despite a series of violent acts by armed insurgent groups including the most dreaded Garo National Liberation Army (GNLA). But areas within 20 km of the state's boundary with Assam are under the purview of the Act. The Home Ministry has declared this 20-km belt 'disturbed', and armed forces deployed in Assam are permitted to go into this area in hot pursuit of rebel groups.

ARUNACHAL PRADESH: Fresh extension

Three districts of the state — Tirap, Changlang and the newly-created Longding — had been under AFSPA since 1991, and the Centre on March 27 brought the whole state under it. But strong protests by the state government and civil society organizations forced the central government to subsequently limit its application to the districts bordering Assam. That leaves seven districts of Arunachal Pradesh out of AFSPA. But even before the March 27 notification — in fact, since 1990 — a 20-km stretch inside the state along the border with Assam had been under AFSPA.


MIZORAM: Appeasement within wounds

Curtains fell on the insurgency in Mizoram on June 30, 1986, with the signing of the Mizo Accord, said to be the only successful accord in the country so far. The signing of the accord simultaneously led to the withdrawal of AFSPA, which had been imposed on the state since the time it was the Lushai Hills district of Assam in the mid-1960s. And yet, the wounds don't seem to have healed completely. Memories of the killing of innocent people, rape, destruction of property, burning of villages and largescale displacement of people remain fresh in the minds of many Mizos.


Conscionable questions:

Questions the delegates must address in the course of the debate:

1. Do we still need the AFSPA in any form?2. Who should have the Power to implement/revoke AFSPA?3. How do we control the turbulent areas if the army is to be removed and

their powers stripped?4. How can the Army be made effective in the turbulent areas?5. To what extent can AFSPA be considered legal?6. How can we protect the civil rights and liberties despite giving certain

autocratic powers to the Army, if at all?7. What consensus can be reached between the polarised factions for and

against AFSPA?8. Should the International Organisations, if any, accentuating on AFSPA

be considered as valid stake-holders to it?9. Should the police has equivalent powers as that of the Army's?10. Are the reports of the three committees plausible?

It is providential for us to understand that AFSP is not entirely dastardly. Insurgency cannot be subdued until our armed forces are equally to the operatives. The fact is, when a soldier withstands a volley of firing from the other side, the most plausible reaction is to provide resilience. However, when one is asked to not just set aim, but even to consider the possible consequences before pulling the trigger, it is conceivable that his abilities and would be infringed. A terrorist doesn't think about facing trial before killing a soldier; and when a soldier is sought to reciprocate the same, yet complied with the cautiousness of having to face a trial, more often than not it would result a triumphant terrorist over a dead soldier. But then again, on the receiving end of the barrel, it could well be a civilian, mistaken or ostentatiously supposed to be a terrorist.


During the course of deliberations over the three days, delegates are expected to contemplate this and many other pertinent arguments. Your professional paradigm is subjected to your political interests; your preferential threshold to your cognitive subjectivity; and your morality to your circumstantial ideology. However, AFSPA has been the cause behind innumerable sons who did no wake up to see the dawn, mothers who as appallingly succumbed to death as affectionately they had embraced their sons, and fathers who relinquished their venerated and cherished abodes for the heavenly one. AFSPA should not be subjected to the status of a trifle contemplative issue; it is a matter of conscience, 'righteous intuitional conscience'. Best of Luck!

------------------END OF DOCUMENT ------------------------

Documents

AIPPM- Background Guide