By ordering the Chhattisgarh Government to disband its 4,000-member group of Special Police Officers, or SPOs, who are involved in counter-insurgency operations against the Maoists, the Supreme Court has erred on several counts. The order, which declares as "unconstitutional" the arming of tribal youth and their appointment as SPOs, will no doubt be a huge setback to security operations in Maoist-infested Chhattisgarh, as the State police have already pointed out. But this is not particularly surprising, given that the order came in response to a petition filed by activists like sociologist Nandini Sundar, historian Ramachandra Guha and former bureaucrat EAS Sarma, whose ideological persuasion has a lot in common with the subversive ideology of Maoists.
For a long time they have provided intellectual legitimacy to the murderous campaign of the Red terrorists. Clearly their petition against Salwa Judum and the appointment of SPOs was aimed at weakening the Chhattisgarh Government's successful campaign against the Maoist insurgency. It is a pity that the Supreme Court chose to overlook the vested interests of the petitioners while passing its judgement. While doing so, the Supreme Court has appropriated to itself a function that belongs entirely in the domain of the executive, in this instance the State Government as well as the Union Government. It is for them to decide how best to tackle armed resistance and a violent challenge to the authority of the state and the values that lie at the core of our Republic.
Let there be no doubt that the Maoists are pursuing an agenda of violence and anarchy. In the guise of pretending to protect the rights of tribals, these home-grown terrorists with an imported ideology are waging a full scale war against the state to establish a Pol Pot like regime. Hence, the Maoists are, in no uncertain terms, enemies of the state and the Government of Chhattisgarh, as well as the Union Government, are entirely within their rights — indeed it is their primary duty — to undertake whatever measures they deem fit to exterminate Left-wing extremism. If those measure include appointing tribal youth as SPOs, then so be it. By ordering the disarming and sacking of SPOs, the judiciary has crossed the line that separates its responsibilities from those of the executive. This is unwarranted and undesirable.
Moreover, Tuesday's order, which effectively delegitimises SPOs, sets a dangerous precedent that can adversely affect security operations elsewhere in the country. Though the order was issued in connection with SPOs appointed and armed by the Chhattisgarh Government, it could be construed to have put a question mark on SPOs similarly employed and armed in other conflict zones, such as in Jammu region. There too villagers are appointed SPOs and their help is sought for counter-insurgency operations. Indeed, as in Chhattisgarh, so also in Jammu they provide crucial real time intelligence and guide regular security forces through alien territory. But for the assistance provided by SPOs in Chhattisgarh, a far greater number of our jawans would have lost their lives while negotiating mined roads and fields and locating Maoist hideouts. Sadly, these facts appear to have been overlooked by the Supreme Court while admitting the spurious demand of activists for whom neither the nation nor national security mean anything.
