Touching some raw nerves

The unseemly controversy generated by Major General V. K. Singh8217;s book India8217;s External Intelligence:

The unseemly controversy generated by Major General V. K. Singh8217;s book India8217;s External Intelligence: Secrets of Research and Analysis Wing, months after it was released, is strange, to say the least. Refuting of some of the 8216;facts8217; mentioned by the ex-Research and Analysis Wing staffer by the government would have been a more democratic response in case of controversial, inaccurate or objectionable arguments or facts in the book. Unleashing a CBI raid on the author and the publisher is harsh and undemocratic. It could even bring charges of misuse of the CBI, one of the few policing agencies in the country, which has maintained some professional standards.

What is it in the book that has invited the ire of the government? Is there something in the book that necessitates raiding the author and the publisher for reasons of breach of Indian 8216;intelligence8217;? R038;AW is a public institution, paid for by the taxpayers8217; money. Indeed, the information it gets and intelligence it gathers could be secret from the national security perspective, but its functioning has to be institutionalised enough to be transparent to the people for whom it works and who pay for it.

Those seeking to know secrets about India8217;s prime external intelligence service, or its network, from this 175-page book, would be disappointed. Its twelve chapters, unassumingly, though lucidly, written, tell a story nevertheless 8212; the story of lack of accountability and transparency even internally, corruption including misuse of powers, authority, privileges and secret funds, organisational anomalies, ad-hocism, lack of professional ethics and so on, in the organisation which has been over-rated and considered a holy cow that must not be questioned. Is Major General Singh lying, or making stories, or writing out of personal grudges? If yes, he is liable for action under relevant legal provisions either for breach of privilege or personal contempt by those finding mention in the book. The charges of leaking official secrets appear remote, if at all they stick. The action against him obviously appears an over-reaction of a hypersensitive and susceptible politico-bureaucratic establishment interested in maintaining the status quo for narrow personal and partisan interests.

Many of the facts narrated in the book about the R038;AW since its creation in 1968, its political misuse during the Emergency, consequent downsizing in 1977, successes and failures have been in the public domain either through media reports or other publications, some of which have been referred to by Singh. He has built the narrative of organisational anomalies on his personal experience during his three-and-a-half-year stay in the R038;AW, none of which can be seen as violating the Official Secrets Act OSA in any respect. There are two things in the book that appear to have offended the touchy establishment. First, he has hinted at misuse of the organisation against political opponents. Second, he has suggested that, given the misuse of scarce public resources in the name of intelligence, the R038;AW be brought under parliamentary scrutiny.

This brings us to the question of utility and relevance of the OSA, a legislation passed by the British Parliament in 1923, being invoked in this case, in the era of satellites and the Internet. The act, upgraded for British India after the experience of the First World War, has occasionally been qualified by judicial pronouncements in some cases; otherwise, it still refers to 8220;Presidency Magistrate8221; and is draconian enough to state that 8220;on a prosecution for an offence punishable under this section it shall not be necessary to show that the accused person was guilty of any particular act tending to show a purpose prejudicial to the safety or interests of the State, and, notwithstanding that no such act is proved against him, he may be convicted if, from the circumstances of the case or his conduct or his known character as proved, it appears that his purpose was a purpose prejudicial to the safety or interests of the State.8221; No wonder, the second

Administrative Reforms Commission recommended that this act be repealed, for it is incongruous with the regime of transparency in a democratic society, and safeguards for state security should be incorporated in the National Security Act.

Indeed, the RTI has excluded organisations such as R038;AW from its purview, but the OSA, 1923 clearly conflicts with the RTI where the provisions relating to obligations of public authority are concerned. Singh8217;s book, read and seen in the light of the antiquated OSA and the RTI, opens up a whole range of issues relating to redefinition of the intelligence agencies and their organisational aspects that must come under the public domain. Does the R038;AW not need parliamentary scrutiny on the sordid

Story continues below this ad

Rabinder Singh episode? Where should agencies such as this be located? Intelligence, excluding the military intelligence, is conceptually part of the police powers of the state and to that extent accountable through scrutiny so that it is not misused. Many such questions arise while reading Singh8217;s book.

Indeed, the unwarranted governmental reaction to the book gives an opportunity to the civil society to ponder over them.

The writer is director, Centre for Public Affairs, Noida