www.nareshminocha.com

 (Image Courtesy: PIB)

 

“Every VIP must remember that he is a VIP because he has a Very Important Duty. Consequently, he must remember that he is given extraordinary security so that he may exert his utmost and contribute his fullest to the security and well-being of the ordinary citizens who are his masters in a democracy”, stated BJP’s veteran Mr. L.K. Advani, way back on 6th April 2000. 

He noted this, as Home Minister, in his keynote address at a seminar on ‘VIP Security – Emerging Challenges’ organised by Special Protection Group (SPG), a statutory force with a mandate to protect Prime Minister.  

Mr. Advani’s reminder has special relevance to PM Narendra Modi’s security breach. This happened during his recent visit to Punjab, triggering political storm. 

Mr. Advani’s wisdom deserves to be mulled over by PM and all Chief Ministers. They are the key propellers of cooperative federalism (CF).  When there is persisting deficit in relationship between PM and Opposition CMs, the risk of security lapse rises. 

The State Police has higher stake in avoiding gaps in safety chain if PM and the Opposition CM share stage at official events organized outside National capital. For this, the ball lies in Mr. Modi’s court. He has to change his political narrative against Opposition-ruled States. He has to unveil a code for conduct for politics and ego-free interface between PM and CMs.(https://bit.ly/3IfWsDg)

Growth-hungry India cannot afford to see recurring instances of CMs of Opposition-ruled States avoiding sharing dais with Mr. Modi. He likes to mix official events with political rallies in his visit to States. BJP supporters boo or heckle CMs during the official events. Mr. Modi acts as a silent spectator on such occasions. Specific instances on this discord, beginning August 2014, would be cited a bit later. The intention here is not to blame any dignitary but to pitch for discord-free Team India under Mr. Modi’s captaincy. 

Periodic reports of CMs complaining about worsening Centre-State relations are neither good for economic development nor for the national security. The way Mr. Modi promotes the concept of double-engine government (BJP at Centre & at State) implies that growth & governance can’t flourish if a State is ruled by BJP. 

Double-Engine (DD) mantra conflicts with the Centre’s dharma to not discriminate between the BJP and non-BJP States. If there is no discrimination, then DD is nothing but political rhetoric. Avoidable hence it is. 

Jharkhand chief minister Hemant Soren last month stated “In the current political scenario wherever there is double engine sarkar that State will receive all the benefits. While opposition-ruled States are always at the receiving end of a political tussle as if in a wrestling ring which is not good for federal governance”.

As put by him: “A Central government cannot simply look down upon and ignore the problems of a state ruled by Opposition parties which happened in our case that too during a global pandemic. Solutions to longstanding problems of state can be found jointly by Centre and state”.

DD mantra disrespects the people’s verdict that is bound to be different for Parliamentary, State and local bodies’ elections. 

It is important for Mr. Modi to act in manner that he seen as every political party’s PM and every Indian’s PM. For this, he has to rein in his passion to act as BJP’s super-magnate that attracts voters. He has stop throwing barbs and allegations at Opposition CMs. Let this job be reserved for BJP’s office-bearers.  The party is not short of talent needed to dish out masala to media.  

The political schism between the ruling party and the Opposition has increased ever since Mr. Modi became PM. So has the security risk to Institution of PM after Mr. Modi’s passion to get closer to cheering crowds forced security forces to make compromises. 

Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) amended Blue Book (BB) on PM’s Security during November 2017 to accommodate his passion. The amendment specifies standard operating procedure (SOP) for such interaction referred to as roadshows.

Official sources quoted SOP as saying, “Though undesirable from security point of view, roadshows, of late, have become one of the preferred modes of political mobilization; particularly during elections and they are likely to remain so in near future”.

They further quoted SOP as stating: “The enormity of the threat bestows huge responsibility upon all stakeholders to make such roadshows a success from successful security point of view. The security threat is enormously enhanced if the PM stands out in the open in the main vehicle”. 

There can’t be good breaches (roadshows) and bad ones (reluctance to greet, if not meet, Gandhian protesters).  It is national interest to have an independent security audit of Blue Book named ‘Rules and Instructions for the Protection of the Prime Minister when on Tours and Travel’. India can’t afford any more compromise in PM’s safety with two hostile neighbours having evil design. 

The security breach at flyover on road to Ferozepur has shown that BB does not provide for crackdown on iron-willed, Gandhian crowd. A leader of the protesting farmers shouted they would not give passage to PM’s convoy even if police fired bullets at them.

BB only says: “no civilian or extraneous force should be able to interrupt/stop the carcade”. Deploring the flyover incident, Punjab CM clarified at post-breach press conference that he is not a person who would order firing at protesting farmers.  

BB should thus specify a strategy to tackle a crowd or few persons/vehicles that suddenly appears on a well-guarded road. What is SPG required to do if few RDX loaded cyclists/motor-bikers suddenly appear on the scene and speeds towards Modi’s carcade? 

This issue has been left hanging since January 2003 when three youths on a motorbike suddenly entered a road on Lutyens Delhi, even though it cordoned off for Prime Minister Mr. A.B Vajpayee’s convoy. Should cops on duty wield lathi or shoot them without warning in such situation? 

Public should be apprised of strategic importance of safeguarding PM. It should be told of zero-tolerance against persons who block PM’s convoy. If a security personnel fires at anyone blocking PM’s passage, then he/she should enjoy immunity from any disciplinary or judicial action. 

As put by Mr. Vajpayee at SPG raising Day on 8th April 1999, “the security agencies should also educate the public and make the people more security-conscious as an alert citizenry would help to make the task of security agencies easier”.

National security is inter-twined with PM’s security. His safety and dignity should thus be every Indian’s concern as two aggressive neighbours are collectively plotting to harm and weaken India. Mr. Modi has to thus avoid unwarranted security risks that are inherent in political rallies or politically-aligned official road journeys.   

Mr. Modi also has to empower SPG and State Police to have the final say on security issues. If SPG and intelligence agencies were given full freedom to speak their mind, they would have advised PM to defer his visit to Punjab just as he avoided visiting unrest-ridden Nagaland while touring Manipur and Tripura. 

Nagaland has seen mass protests against killing of civilians by a central security force during December 2021 due to mistaken identity. PM has observed stony silence on Naga killings, thereby hurting Naga sentiments. Insurgents have already called for avenging ambush and killing of innocent civilians. All such incidents including Naxal violence multiply challenges for security of VVIPs and VIPs.

PM should give his safety precedence over BJP’s interests by respecting advice given by security agencies. It is pertinent to cite here crucial observations made by Supreme Court (SC) way back in 1996.

The observations are contained in apex court’s verdict on role of SPG in protecting PM and ex-PM, P.V. Narasimha Rao. SPG cover for Ex-PMs was withdrawn in 2019 by amending SPG Act. 

In 1996, Delhi Police told Delhi High Court it was not possible to provide satisfactory security cover to Mr. Rao at Tis Hazari district Court in Old Delhi. The local court had issued summons to Mr. Rao as an accused in criminal case. The police, acting in consultation with SPG, urged Delhi High Court to shift hearing at a safer place. Failing to get favourable response, Delhi Police petitioned SC. 

In its judgment dated 11th October 1986, the apex court noted that SPG is required to provide proximate security to PM. This means providing protection to PM from close quarters during journey by any means of transport. 

SC noted that “It is for the SPG to devise how to render meaningful protection to the protectee” in a given situation. It noted that SPG Act empowered SPG to requisition assistance of any authority including military.  

Video shots of the Mr. Modi’s security breach apparently suggest that neither SPG nor Punjab Police acted in keeping with this Judgment. They thus inadvertently allowed a dangerous situation to linger on: PM becoming a sitting duck perched on flyover for 20 minutes. 

SOP for roadshows should have, at least, been invoked at flyover to minimize security risk. This incident implies SPG has either not visualized all kind of security breaches or didn’t practice enough how to safely take away PM immediately from dangerous situation. Or, is there more to it than meets the eye? 

TV channels trumpeted video of Mr. Modi sitting in his car on flyover, along with secret intelligence report. The objective was to prove that Punjab Government made PM vulnerable to drone attack from Pakistan, RDX explosion from under the flyover or snipper riffle attack.

Did SPG requisition helicopter to airlift PM from the flyover? Did it call BSF or the army? Did SPG ask IAF to initiate air surveillance perhaps with aid of drone in radius of say one or two kilometers where PM convoy was struck?

Was moderately bad weather a huge risk for VVIP helicopter to come to rescue of PM? Why it took 20 minutes for motorcade to take a U-turn? Did SPG advice PMO to purchase latest VVIP helicopters as replacement for three Augusta Westland choppers? These were mothballed after mid-way cancellation of this Italian contract over bribery charges. 

Did PM not know that farmers’ protest in Punjab had not died down? After farm laws repeal, Punjab farmers and farm labourers shifted focus to demands that fall in State’s domain. 

Nine farmers’ union had given public call to reach Mr. Modi’s Ferozepur rally site for protests against unresolved issues. The visuals and stories of farmers driving towards Ferozepur on rally eve was commonplace knowledge.

In such a situation, Punjab Police and SPG should have jointly or separately urged PM to call off his visit.  More so, as weather forecast ostensibly proved that it was risky for VVIP chopper, Russian-made Vi-M17V5, to fly in such situation. Was helicopter ride more risker than road journey knowing well protesting farmer’s resolve? Factor in improvised explosive devices dropped by Pakistan drones in Ferozepur district and the possibility of it taken away by extremists. 

One basic question that must be answered were policemen on road duty apprised of their duty as specified in BB. It is pertinent to quote Mr. Advani: “Experience, however, shows that it is the weakest link in a security chain (coordination) that often proves the most vulnerable. We should, therefore, quickly evolve a system to raise the efficacy of State and district level agencies”.

Many more such questions would obviously by SC-constituted Committee on PM’s security breach. The Committee is headed by retired SC judge, Justice Indu Malhotra. The committee should dissect security lapse and future risks from all angles to avoid recurrence of any unforeseen breach in future.

For this, PMO should voluntarily give all information relating to the planning of Ferozepur visit. No probe can be comprehensive without access to call records of SPG, Punjab police, Punjab CM and PM during the crucial 20 minutes. 

It here pertinent to ring in again Mr. Advani’s quote on VIP’s very important duty. In case of PM, the two most relevant duties are national security and Team India captaincy.  

Was it not the duty of Mr. Modi to warn Pakistan against frequent air-dropping of weapons including RDX packed in tiffin boxes in Ferozepur and elsewhere in Punjab for about two years? We all know how he delivers stern warnings to enemy nation at election rallies. (bit.ly/2K709lH)

Did the Centre equip Punjab Police or BSF with latest technology to jam Pakistan drones and force-land them safely? 

Mr. Modi should explain to the Nation why he has not convened Inter-State Council (ISC) meeting to discuss threats to internal security due to drone sorties to States adjoining Pakistan.

Did President of India tell PM to respect presidential order dated 25th May 1990 order, mandating at least three ISC meeting in a year? Did President ever ask Mr. Modi why ISC has met only once under his chairmanship in seven years? As CM, Mr. Modi earned hearts of all nationalists for his repeated suggestion that ISC should meet at least twice a year. 

Should PM spend too much time and energy in electoral politics or in strengthening cooperative federalism? He ought to revive National Integration Council, which has not even met once after he became PM. Ditto for Commission on National Population. Both institutions are chaired by PM. 

Should Mr. Modi expose Institution of PM frequently to avoidable risk of Covid infection at election rallies? Did SPG advice PM to shun this risk? Wud infection of Mr. Modi’s cabinet colleagues such as Defence Minister Rajnath Singh not worsen policy paralysis & endanger national security? Some draft policies are pending for decades. (https://goo.gl/XK3CD5)

Statesmanship deficit can lead to security concerns. It can weaken further cooperative federalism especially in realm of coordination between Centre, States and district administration during PM’s visit to States. There are several specific instances to drive home this point. 

Mr. Modi didn’t enhance the stature of PM’s office by making a comment on returning to Bhatinda airport after being stuck in flyover for 15-20 minutes due to road blockade by protesting farmers.

A news agency quoted officials at airport as PM telling them: “Apne CM ko thanks kehna, ki mein Bathinda airport tak zinda laut paaya” (Convey thanks to your CM that I was able to return to Bathinda airport alive). 

Mr Modi has not denied this quote, which was promptly cited by Union Minister Smriti Irani at BJP press conference held on 5th January shortly after PM returned back to airport. This quote obviously helped her reinforce the allegation that Congress intended to physically harm Modi. The quote galvanized BJP rank and file to spew venom at the Congress and give instant verdicts against Punjab Government. 

BJP would hopefully present all incriminating evidence to Justice Indu Malhotra Committee. Ideally, PMO should present a dossier to the Committee on assassination plots Mr. Modi faced since 2004.  This would help committee grasp the issues well and make appropriate recommendations.  

PM’s jibe at Punjab CM does not gel with spirit of cooperative federalism. The Punjab CM Charanjit Singh Channi is not “your” (state officials’) CM. He is our CM for every Indian just as Mr. Modi is our PM for every Indian. 

Team India Captain should never address his team members (CMs) in such perfunctory manner. Mr. Modi could have directly spoken to Mr Channi when he was struck in the car. PM could have penned a letter to CM, sharing his disappointment over unfruitful visit. And Mr. Channi could have, in turn, invited Mr. Modi to visit Punjab again on official tour for which water-tight security would be arranged.

We hope SC would seek call records of PM & SPG during the period when his motorcade was stopped one Kilometer away from farmers. 

This brings us to the larger need for a specific code of conduct for Team India including CMs and State Ministers.  The code must specify dos and don’ts for PM and his ministers in their public interface with CMs and state ministers. The code must restrain PM & his ministerial colleagues from mixing official duties and party’s electioneering work.  

Mr. Modi loves to combine his political rallies with official functions for inauguration of projects/schemes or for laying foundation stone during his visit to States in the run-up to elections. 

Even Official Functions are packed with BJP supporters who specialize in humiliating CMs of Opposition-ruled States. Congress CMs prefer to avoid sharing stage with Modi. The fractured Centre-States ties and Opposition CMs’ reluctance to share stage with PM at official events is contributing to gaps in PM’s security arrangements.   

Remember how Haryana CM Bhupinder Singh Hooda was booed by BJP fans in presence of Mr. Modi at official event organised to launch a road project at Kaithal. Mr. Hooda had to rush through his speech amidst catcalls from the crowd.

After the event, Mr. Hooda said: “It was meant to be an official function but turned into a political rally. The BJP has violated the pride of the institution of PM. I went to keep the pride of the chair. In future, I will never attend a function with the PM,” Mr Hooda said.

Maharashtra Chief Minister Prithviraj Chavan followed suit during the same month. CM skipped a function where PM launched proposed Nagpur metro. Mr. Chavan explained his decision: “I have taken a decision on the basis of a previous visit of the Prime Minister”. Mr Chavan was booed during two functions on 16th August at 2014 at Raigad and Solapur.

“The Prime Minister's functions in the Congress-ruled states are hurting the federal structure,” Mr Chavan added. “Yesterday, Hooda, too, took a similar decision. What happened in Solapur was politically motivated”.

PM-CM relationship marked a new low during May 2018 when Karnataka CM Siddaramaiah served a legal notice on Mr. Modi. CM had sought apology for defamatory statements against him or threatened Rs 100-crore suit during May 2018. 

Leave aside Congress CMs, recall how West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee felt humiliated by BJP supporters at a function organized to mark 125th birth anniversary of Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose during January 2021. Modi fans chanted ‘Jai Shri Ram’ slogans when Ms Banerjee rose to speak at the function. The chants had no relation with the event. She refused to speak at the event. 

BJP should have acted smartly by inviting her to Ram Mandir Foundation ceremony where she and Mr. Modi could have been greeted with Jai Shri Ram.  

Remember the Centre-State storm over the lack of interface between her and Modi at a meeting convened to discuss Yaas cyclone. Another instance in point is bitterness between Mr. Modi and the then Andhra CM N Chandrababu Naidu during 2018. Faced with repeated attacks by PM, Mr. Naidu dubbed him as “blackmailer” who “threatens” everybody to make them fall in line.

More instances of CMs airing their grievances publicly against Modi need not be recalled further to drive home the point: fractured Centre-State ties can contribute to laxity in security arrangements for PM’s visit to States. 

Covid protocol proved handy for Punjab CM to excuse himself from receiving Mr. Modi and sharing dais with him at official functions. Would security arrangement have been better had Punjab Police had known well in advance that both CM and PM would be moving together by road to sites of official events?

Suffice it to say that both VVIPs and VIPs have been found wanting in performing their duties to serve the citizens and the country well. They should jointly shift from political theatre to Vikas platform.

As put by Mr. Modi at an event held during November 2021, the elected representatives of public should have “only one mantra -duty, duty, duty”. 

                                                                   ends