evidence: Notably, AFSPA includes an explicit immunity clause: "No prosecution, suit or other legal proceeding shall be instituted, except with previous sanction of the Central Government" against officials acting under AFSPA.164 The realities of the immunity clause have been devastating. In the last twenty-eight years, neither the Home Secretary nor the Defense Secretary has approved a single prosecution under AFSPA.165 Moreover, there is concern that AFSPA’s immunity has bled into proceedings against police officials, making them nearly impossible to launch.166 Although activists throughout India have challenged the AFSPA’s constitutionality, the Court has held that the army’s powers are not "unreasonable" or "arbitrary."167 If the impunity regime created by AFSPA does not reveal India’s attempts to silence the indigenous, the AFSPA’s origins perhaps do. AFSPA took its inspiration from a British colonial ordinance — the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Ordinance of 1942 — utilized to suppress the "Quit India Movement" in India’s battle for independence.168 The rationales for the modern-day AFSPA are not far from the colonial ones: upholding the "sovereignty and territorial integrity of India" and combating "terrorist acts."169 This kind of parallel is not unique to the Kashmir case — "colonial and settler colonial forms[] often coexist and mutually support each other."170