National security legislation often creates a delicate balance between governmental authority and personal freedoms. In India, this tension is particularly evident through a combination of colonial-era and post-independence laws that regulate armed conflicts and insurgencies. This study focuses on the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act, 1958 (AFSPA), exploring its roots in colonial rule, key operational clauses, and the important constitutional and human rights issues it presents. It reviews the development of court rulings—from the relatively lenient approach in Naga People's Movement of Human Rights v. Union of India (1998) to the stronger emphasis on accountability in EEVFAM v. Union of India (2016)—as a dynamic body of legal thought. The analysis suggests that necessary changes are required by constitutional principles and can be implemented effectively while maintaining essential security goals.
Yash Bhardwaj (Tue,) studied this question.