The Three Chiefs finally get to join the esteemed club within 60 years of Independence!

Home

Soldiers' Speak Out

Counterpoint

A General Speaks

A BRIEF ON THE ISSUE (Compiled from Media Reports)

The controversy over the non-inclusion of three service chiefs in the list of VIPs exempt from security checks at the airports has been resolved with their inclusion in the exemption category by the government. "I think it is appropriate to give them exemption who defend our country`s borders," Civil Aviation Minister Praful Patel told reporters in the Parliament.

Mr. Patel said that the three service chiefs have been included at number 12 in the warrant of precedence issued by the Rashtrapati Bhawan indicating thereby that those who figure in the warrant are waived from security checks at the airports.

Asked whether such exemption would open a Pandora`s Box with fresh demands coming from different sections, the minister replied in the negative.

"We have a committee which goes into all such issues before taking a decision...Only the e service chiefs have been included... There is no question of opening a Pandora`s Box," he said.

The fact that the privileges the airport authorities extend to cabinet ministers, ministers of state, several senior officials, VIPs including the husband of Priyanka Gandhi among others was missing for the chiefs of Army, Navy and Air Force has upset many in the military.

The Deputy Chairman of the Planning Commission has also been given exemption from security check at the airports.

We requested the eminent citizens to share their valuable thoughts on the issue.

In a growing democracy as ours, is it fair to have a debate on the issue wherein we have politicians bickering about this issue?
Why did it take a person no less than the civil-aviation minister to make a statement?, should this not have been an integral part of our system?
Do you feel it is fair that three chiefs had to undergo frisking earlier, when politicians could get away with anything and everything?

Responses

Comde. Ranjit .B.Rai (Retd),

The defence chiefs who are responsible for security of the country have seen their precedence falling since their independence.
The example of service chief being frisked is another callous example which has been rectified only after being brought up in the parliament.
The Govt. is honour-bound to reinstate the status of service chief and senior officers.
The Govt. of India has a system of working where the Ministry of Civil Aviation looks after the airport matters and therefore the responsibility fell on the civil-aviation minister.

Lt Gen (Dr) MM Walia, PVSM, AVSM, SM, PhD (Retd),

Personally I do not feel happy to have a situation where the chiefs are equated to Robert Vadra.
It is a shame that they had to ask for this benefit and the fact that they were frisked earlier was wrong.
It is a waste of time to have this debate; it is something which should have been done and been a part of the system.
If chiefs are to be frisked, then what shall be the respect for the army?
This should be extended to Lt .Gen’s and Maj.Gen’s also befitting the office they hold.

Air Vice Marshal Kapil Kak, AVSM,VSM (Retd), (Dir, Centre for Air Power Studies),

We have to look at it in the respect of the International scene, we have to differentiate between two issues - the Security and the Warrant of precedence.
Ideally, no one should be exempted from security check except the President, the Vice President and the Prime Minister.
It is a mockery of the system when one minister of state creates an issue and Govt. makes a list of individuals to being exempted.
We are mixing two issues and there is no requirement to do so as they are separate issues all-together.
“An important issue of national security has become an bargaining leverage between individuals for Security Frisking exemption. If any exemptions have to be given they must not be linked to the warrant of precedence rather to the nature of job performed by that high office; In which case the service chiefs must necessarily be exempted, I am happy that the Govt. has taken a right decision in this regard.”

Col R.S.Perhar (Retd), Tulip IT Services,

The issue that needs to be understood is that why frisking is done - to identify the arms and equipments which can be used for militant activity.
A certain Constitutional functionary – which by nature of their profile can’t be involved in any situation hampering national security should be exempt. When the rule was introduced few offices were given exemption, when the Govt expanded this list they should have included the chiefs.
Using the warrant of precedence, the order for exemption should have been prepared.
The Govt. should take a holistic view; now the government has reacted and this was done because an issue was raised… why did the Civil-Aviation minister refuse in first place?
The Govt. is not clear what it wants… this is an incorrect methodology.

Col Anil Sachdev (Retd),

It is welcomed and it is wonderful news, they are the heads of the services for national security - the kind of profile and the job they perform, it calls for total exemption.
It is sad that in our country this kind of debate should have happened, this issue should have been cleared in the beginning itself.

Brig Arun Sahgal (Retd), PhD,

It has to be seen in the larger context, there should be separate enclosures for people who have such exemptions as is the practice world wide.
Earlier there was a list, now it has been expanded and now the demand will increase and the fact is that such exemption creates dilution and this creates a security concern.
The fact that the chiefs had to secure this concession from the parliament, speaks of the dilution of Army Honour.
Their status has to be accorded due recognition; the services should not extract such privileges but it should be there for them because of the office they hold.