Anti Naxalite militia Salwa Judum-a case of police outsourcing gone too far?

Before reading the entire judgement(http://supremecourtofindia.nic.in/outtoday/wc25007.pdf), I was taking the ultra right view that the Supreme Court is playing into the arms of Naxals, and endangering national security. But after reading the entire judgement and reasoning, my ideas changed too much.


This month(July 2011), the apex Indian legal court(Supreme Court) declared unconstitutional, the tribal militia armed and financed by the State of Chhatisgarh. For some background, note that the Maoist Naxal violence earlier confined to the mineral rich belts of Orissa, Chhatisgarh, Jharkhand etc is now spreading to all deprived areas including Maharashtra, AP etc. An estimate is that 100+ Indian districts are now under the Naxal sway. Besides issues of internal security, this also holds up 'development' projects-both by Government and private sector. The conventional police means have not worked, so the State Governments are trying all means like amnesty schemes, arrests of supporters and special tribal compsoed state sponsored(Indian government often funded upto 80%) militas like the Swala Judum/Koya Commandoes. It is this last one which was under appeal.

The press and 'Civil Society' activists have largely opposed it on ideological grounds-that the State cannot arm tribals, that they are used as cannon fodder etc. These grounds may be valid, but they are policy choices which even courts cannot question. What was questioned(and grounds for holding the militia unconstitutional) was

1. State abdicating its responsibility to police:- Salwa Judum was seen as an 'off balance sheet' police force, with arms loaned to them, and money given as 'stipend'. The State did not have to contend with tricky questions on human rights violations etc. The Court objected to the State relinquishing its monopoly on violence
2. Unfairness to tribals:- While expected to do similar duties, under like disciplinary codes and exposed to greater risks, the SPOs just got a 'stipend' and a 'temporary appointment'. No special counter insurgency training was given to them, thus causing risks to both themselves and society. It is therefore unfair under Article 14. Contrast this to the Greyhound force in Andhra Pradesh of simillar composition/objectives, but with a critical difference, that Greyhound staff was part of the AP police, and given superior training/status. This did not happen in Salwa Judum, reading to much higher death rates of 6%, compared to 1%(average) for Central & State forces.
3. Questionable motivation:- Both army and police recruitment tests apply psychological screens to weed out vigilantist/paranoid personnel, or those who cannot act coolly and dispassionately.  This may lead to field mistakes/massacres, but also far graver consequences.  Local enmities, normal social conflict, and even assertion of individuality by others against over-bearing attitude of
   such SPOs, could be cause to brand persons unrelated to Maoist activities as Maoists, or Maoist sympathizers.
4. Post termination consequences:- A SPO could be terminated for far lesser cause and without appeal, than a regular police constable. His erstwhile opponents(Naxals) would target him both for his past actions, and then for his special knowledge on informers, operations etc. In that scenario, the sacked SPO would refuse to surrender arms and may pose a risk to society. And when India does not have a witness protection scheme or a way to protect high risk targets(except jail), his concern would be valid. Given that 1200+(out of 3000-6500 SPOs) were sacked since inception, this problem is not a small one.

The way forward:- The argument of Salwa Judum being a 'force multiplier' has been rejected. So unless the Government inducts these milita members into the police, there seems little scope to comply with the SC ruling, as disarm net is otherwise impossible. And hopefully, police outsourcing next time will be less blatant. India does not have its Blackwaters yet, so till then only the State can do the policing function.