Debate: IURP vs NDRP

The last round of debate was between the Indian United Republic Party vs National Democratic Reform Party. The topic of debate was ‘ AFSPA and its viability’. The IURP made its opening statement with a very formal explanation of the AFSPA law that was recommended in 1990 and the fact that Article 355 does not have a decentralized outlook and other generic facts that are known. NDRP raised a point of information asking the opposition party to give their stance on whether they're for or against AFSPA law as it wasn't clear in their opening statement. The opposition answered by saying that they support the AFSPA law. NDRF’s opening statement made it a very clear view that they were ‘against AFSPA’. They went on to talk about the fact that they can't give people the power to kill, furthermore the point of human rights comes in.

In their main argument, IURP claimed that once they come to power, they will make sure to resume section 4 against Human Rights which they also said that in their manifesto will spend more budget on the army. NDRP made their main argument, starting by stating clear facts that in 1947-2000 around 50,000 people were displaced and 40% of them were from Northeastern states. They thought of AFSPA from a philosophical perspective, they said ‘can we say these people are a threat to nationality and we’ll kill them?’ They went on to criticize the factual arguments made by the opposition party which did not make sense at all.

A point of information was raised by the NDRP, they went on to say that ‘AFSPA gives the right to kill (in J&K and Northeastern states), how does one expect the person to be presented before the judiciary within 24 hours. The opposition responded by saying that AFSPA helps people in problematic situations, and they continued to state facts that claim that they support the law.

The closing statement was first given by the IURP opposition party and pointed out Human Rights in relation to AFSPA. They said, ‘Do you want those heinous people to live on with society?’ and continued on the lines of the arguments which were already made by them in the previous arguments. Next, NDRP in their closing statement went on to bash the opposition party. They claimed that the opposition’s statement ‘we want land but not people, why can't we give them autonomy?’ was problematic. NDRP ended by saying that the opposition party’s argument was like the pencil they hand which was pointless and useless.