Terrorism and internal security

THE APPALLING SEPTEMBER 11 terrorist strikes in the United States have raised questions about managing internal security in countries around the world. Therefore, it is perhaps inevitable that India also embarks on a process which increases its degree of preparedness against acts of terrorism and which results in the acquisition of greater expertise in disaster management. It is true that this country has been a victim of the export of terror for many years. But what the World Trade Center/Pentagon attacks have provoked - with the use of hijacked commercial aircraft as payloads for destruction - are fears of a changing and even more hazardous form of international terrorism. The Union Home Minister, Mr. L. K. Advani's warning that the threats from nuclear, chemical and biological weapons can no longer be dismissed out of hand may sound somewhat alarmist. But it does - in a grim and unpleasant way - draw attention to the need of learning the right lessons from the terrorist strikes on the United States. Both the necessary arrangements to deter such strikes and the necessary expertise to handle the emergency situations which arise as a result of them need to be evolved.

Against such a background, the suggestion that a new Central agency be set up to tackle crimes related to terrorism, hijacking and attacks on sensitive installations is generally not a bad one. While the Centre does have its compulsions for establishing such an agency to deal with crimes with national security implications, it is absolutely imperative that any such mechanism contains the necessary safeguards to ensure that the responsibility of the State Governments is not infringed. If the idea of setting up such an agency finds wide acceptance, it will only be on the condition that the delicate institutional balance between Centre and States on questions relating to law and order is not skewed inequitably. Not surprising, a few States are reportedly uncomfortable with the idea of establishing such an agency. As for the proposal to set up a National Disaster Management Agency, apparently to be modelled on the lines of FEMA in the U.S., there can be few objections. The minimum action programme outlined by Home Secretary, Mr. Kamal Pande - which includes the setting up of State-level disaster management agencies with sub-units in all district headquarters - is also well worth acting upon. Recent experience suggests that systems and procedures alone can never prevent terrorist strikes - particularly if they are carried out by suicide squads - but it is the duty of the Government to do whatever it can to insulate the people from such attacks as well as manage their horrendous aftermath.

Drawing up a list of vulnerable targets, equipping the police for search and rescue work, establishing mechanisms of civil defence, upgrading dog squads - the sooner such proposals are implemented, the better. But such measures have to be clearly distinguished from attempts to formulate new terrorist legislation or frame a new law that replaces the now defunct and discredited TADA. The bureaucracy and the political executive of varying hues all suffer from the unfortunate misconception that the lack of sharp legal teeth is an important reason for the country's failure to make a quick meal of terrorism. This is plainly false. The country's security forces are already armed with wideranging powers under the existing laws to deal with terrorists. Moreover, TADA-like laws can be put to horrible misuse and our experience has clearly demonstrated that terrorism feeds off the human rights abuses perpetrated under the legal cover such legislation provides. However real or serious the threat of terrorism, nothing justifies the introduction of draconian legislation which inevitably results in gross human rights violations and which, at the end of the day, is likely be counter-productive.

Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Section  : Opinion
Next     : Need for a concerted effort