A dangerous trend

THE CAT IS finally out of the bag. The Naval headquarters has quietly changed tack to accept that the commando on duty at the Navy Chief's residence has `amended his statement' and confessed to fabricating evidence of the intrusion. Apparently, he was suffering from a bout of depression and might have even contemplated suicide. Whatever his personal problems or psychological pressures, one thing becomes clear - such persons must not be trusted with the job of ensuring security of key functionaries or security installations. From the very beginning, it was obvious that the intruder theory was `made up' by the commando after the shooting incident. The circumstances were so suspicious that the Delhi police could not buy the intruder line and might have waited for this retraction from the Navy to wind up their investigations. But the Navy has its job cut out. It must keep the commando under observation and get to the bottom of the whole problem. What made him empty 21 bullets at the dead of night and then fabricate evidence to bring in an intruder needs to be unravelled. This kind of a situation must be prevented in the future.

If there was an intruder, it would have raised serious questions on the security mechanism in such a high-security residence. But now, the admission by the security guard has turned the focus on the state of mental health and physical fitness of those drafted for such sensitive duty. A security guard has to be on permanent alert and is likely to be under constant stress and tension. This makes him vulnerable to mental fatigue and even depression, particularly if the domestic environment is not too congenial. But, it is dangerous to let such individuals stand on duty, providing security to high-risk VVIPs. This is something that not just the Defence Services but the entire security establishment needs to review. Every security guard manning a sensitive post - residence, office or installation - needs to be 100 per cent fit, both physically and mentally. When there are any indications to suggest that a person suffers from any problem, health-wise or psychologically, he must be shifted from there. Otherwise, this is the kind of problem that will crop up. What happened at Navy House last week should not be dismissed as just an isolated case that can be conveniently ignored and forgotten. It is a clear pointer to a deeper malaise and needs to be addressed as such.

Both the Home Ministry and the Defence Ministry must lay down the norms and standards to be followed in picking personnel for security duty. They are not ordinary watchmen who can afford to lower their guard or be carried away by personal problems. The authorities must be careful in selecting staff for security and must rotate them to ensure that they can recoup from the strains of constant vigil and tension. Their health and mental state needs to be carefully monitored as frequently as possible so that they can discharge their duty responsibly. It must be part of human resources management to put them on counselling when they face personal problems. Just as the standards of the National Security Guards and those providing proximate security to VVIPs are higher, the Governments at the Centre and in the States must ensure that personnel drafted for guarding high profile or sensitive areas are younger and fully fit for the job. Their condition must be constantly monitored so that they can be removed from duty if they do not meet the standards. Since it involves the security of VVIPs, their offices and residences as well as sensitive installations, there should be no compromise on standards. By letting such individuals take on onerous responsibilities, the security establishment is taking an unnecessary risk, which is a dangerous thing to do.

Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Section  : Opinion
Previous : An unwarranted step
Next     : Spectre of imports