Written by
in
Mentors comment –
Sir, please check my answer.
Razor pay ID: CICAgJCkl-y8dw
Sumita
Your knowledge on the topic is good, answer is also pretty decent.
Introduction is fine.
Next part can be made a bit concise, mention the powers which make it seem that it is a license to kill (power to shoot is good, some others can also be mentioned), plus the example can be made concise, it takes up a lot of space. Also, try to take a more balanced stand, in last line you can add that it has been used only where all other forces of the state have failed to bring the situation under control.
In utility, you have mentioned the negatives which are good, but again, there must be some reason that it is still in force. So, significance in the context of security situation in north-east should also be mentioned.
A seperate way forward can be mentioned before concluding, just mentioning 1-2 short points will do.
You can refer to the model answer in the WhatsApp group for additional content.
Keep practicing. 🙂
4.5/10
KAxwxqQfLmB68Q
Akanksha
Decent attempt, your knowledge on the topic is fine, presentation can be a bit better.
Introduction first para is good.
Next 3 points can be mentioned when you talk about utility.
Analysis of ‘license to kill’ is fine, you can mention example where it has led to loss of lives, then come to a balanced conclusion.
In utility part you need to show both sides, so those three points can be mentioned here, plus you can add that it is used only when all other state forces have failed. Drawbacks are fine.
2nd ARC, Jeevan Reddy committee recommendation can be mentioned in way forward. Some other short points can also be mentioned here- need of investigation in alleged cases of human rights violations, socio-economic development of north-east etc.
Finally, conclude.
Keep practicing. 🙂
KAGzgZs81fpuUo
Vishwendra
Introduction makes it seem like AFSPA is a generic act which provides immunity to armed forces..you can mention that it is used mainly in insurgency affected areas and also only when all other state forces have failed. Historical perspective is fine.
Content of the answer is good, first you have explained the utility, that’s fine..both positives and criticisms have been mentioned..in criticism you can add that there are allegations that the act has failed to contain terrorism and restore normalcy in disturbed areas.
In next part subheading can be better, you need to analyse whether it is a ‘license to kill’; first mention why it is considered a license to kill by many (mention the draconian powers-Power to use force including opening fire; power to arrest without warrant, power to destroy structures etc, then you can give the examples) ; then you can talk about the recommendations and way forward and finally arrive at the conclusion.
Keep practicing. 🙂
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.