Opinion Express View on Parliament security breach: Protect the House

On Wednesday, December 13, two young men — Sagar Sharma and Manoranjan D — jumped into the Lok Sabha gallery, shouted anti-establishment slogans and opened canisters that let out yellow smoke. They were soon subdued by MPs and security. While panic gripped the House, outside it, Neelam Azad and Amol Shinde let out yellow smoke. The vapour turned out to be harmless. The perpetrators who engaged in the criminal, misguided attempt to hijack proceedings have been arrested. It is almost certain they will be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. But what is most shocking about December 13 is the laxity, the failure really, of Parliament security and the intelligence apparatus. That the new building could be breached so easily, on the anniversary of the terrorist attack in 2001, brings up horrific scenarios of what might have been.

The Lok Sabha Secretariat has suspended eight security personnel. Yet, many questions remain unanswered. After the 2001 armed attack, a complete security overhaul including CCTV cameras, barricades and electric fencing were put in place in the old Parliament building. These measures are reportedly in place in the new structure as well. But the breach on Wednesday occurred from the visitors’ gallery and the canisters in the shoes of the perpetrators did not set off metal detectors. The new Parliament has seen an increase in visitors without a commensurate increase in security personnel. The risks in the very structure of the new building — the reduced height between the visitors’ gallery and the floor of the House — may need to be mitigated. The reports of the Delhi Police reviewing security arrangements after Khalistani separatist Gurpatwant Singh Pannu threatened an attack on the House make the lapse all the more perplexing. These issues — and many more — will have to be resolved by the committee set up by the Union home ministry under Anish Dayal Singh, DG, CRPF.

Advertisement

It is also important, amid the necessary conversation on its security, to remember what Parliament stands for. In the aftermath of the attack, Defence Minister Rajnath Singh asked “all MPs… to remain alert and exercise caution” while giving out passes. He also asked Opposition members not to “precipitate anarchy” because the Lok Sabha Speaker and the government had already begun inquiries. There is some merit, perhaps, in his words. The miscreants were indeed issued visitor passes by an MP. But the protection of the House must go hand-in-hand with its openness. Parliament is both of the people and for the people — it must remain open to them, as it has throughout the history of independent India. The suspension of 14 Opposition MPs for demanding — albeit in a noisy, perhaps even unruly manner — that the Home Minister answer for the security breach must be rethought. Just as the building that is a symbol of Indian democracy must be secure, so must also be the elected representatives who are its voice.