To be Frisked or not to be Frisked (July, 2009)

When officials of America’s Continental Airlines recently frisked India’s former President APJ Abdul Kalam, it touched a raw nerve.

Despite protests by Indian security men, Kalam, also referred as India’s missile man for his contribution in the field, was made to take off his footwear and physically checked in New Delhi before he could embark on his journey to America.

Kalam, known for his down to earth demeanor went through the security process without much ado.

An-uproar followed in Parliament with demands that the concerned American carrier be banned, India’s civil aviation minister has called on the Prime Minister to brief him on the issue while a police report has been lodged to investigate the matter.

Some said that as a response to such overbearing attitude by an American carrier, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, on a visit to India, should be put through security checks.

This, however, is not the first time that the issue of an important person, referred in Indian security parlance as Very Very Important Person (VVIP), being bodily frisked has caught attention.

In the past, New Delhi reacted angrily to then federal defense minister George Fernandes being searched (he had to take off his shoes and socks) by security officials in America in a post-September 11, 2001, security check.

Fernandes, known for his anti-US tirades, was apparently "disrobed", according to former deputy secretary of state Strobe Talbott, not once but twice.

Talbott, in a book chronicling the events, says Fernandes was angered by the incidents.

Last year, New Delhi took offense to Russian security officials insisting on searching Foreign Minister Pranab Mukherjee, who was on a visit to the country.

Though the search statutes exist on paper, in most instances ministers are not actually frisked, accompanied as they are by an entourage of officials and bodyguards, who usher them through.

In Mukherjee’s case, it was apparent that Moscow wanted to convey its unhappiness with New Delhi's new found bonhomie with the US that translated into more defense deals and the civilian nuclear pact.

A feel-up was one way of conveying the irritation as Moscow does know a bit about Indian politicians' aversion to being body searched.

In the recent past, an offended junior minister Anand Sharma created a furor by arguing with officials at the New Delhi airport and eventually got the rule book changed to exclude him self from being searched for bombs.

Somnath Chatterjee, former Speaker of the Lok Sabha, the Lower House of India’s Parliament, is known to particularly squeamish about being searched by airport security officials.

He cancelled a trip to London, to follow up on a similar instance in 2005 to Sydney, even as frenzied diplomatic efforts by the Indian High Commission for an exemption failed.

The British Foreign office was clear about international security guidelines that “only Heads of States are exempted.”

However, Chatterjee was equally adamant, explaining that he cancelled the trip “because it involves the honor of the constitutional office”.

In 2005 Chatterjee canceled his visit to Australia following a verbal war of words in the media on the issue. He also has had big problems with his wife being required to walk through a scanner while traveling within India.

Most ordinary citizens know about the rigors of security checks, including a physical rub-down, in times when terrorism is at an ugliest.

However, some seek to be above this process, as a measure of their importance and image.

Even as foreign security drills are more difficult to tamper, the list of those eligible to forego domestic airport checks has been drastically amended to suit individual interests, in the game of political patronage, where outward show of power matters a bit.

In the 1980s, there were only five exemptions: president, vice president, prime minister, chief justice of the Supreme Court, speaker of the Lok Sabha (the Lower House of Parliament) and state governors. Today it includes cabinet ministers, ministers of state, bureaucrats and sundry others with access to the powers-that-be.

Yet, there was some sympathy late last year when it came to the fore that India’s military chiefs are by statute required to be frisked at domestic airports.

This was a reflection of the unflattering status of the defense forces in India's civilian democratic setup, unlike in a country such as Pakistan.

On paper, the heads of the three armed forces, navy, air force and army, were supposed to be treated like civilians and required to be searched by security personnel before they could board a passenger flight.

The service chiefs are otherwise responsible for the security of the nation, protect the borders against incursions, command the second-largest army in the world and sophisticated arsenal.

While nobody argues for the overbearing primacy of the military in civil society, what pinched was the list of exemptions that had been granted.

It was an irony that a private businessman Robert Vadra, the son-in-law of Congress party president Sonia Gandhi, and husband of Priyanka Gandhi, was exempt, as were some senior bureaucrats outranked by the service chiefs.

Following a bit of media furor, defense minister A K Antony took up the matter with the federal civil aviation ministry, at the behest of the three service chiefs who had previously written a letter requesting an exemption.

Initially, the aviation ministry refused Antony’s proposal.

The reasoning was that other authorities, mostly civil servants who head ministries and are referred to as secretaries, would voice similar demands.

Thankfully, the list now stands amended and the Generals do not have to line up even if on paper.

The near obsession about freedom from airport frisking, however, is just at the tip of the exemptions and perks that are sought by India’s power holders who still carry a colonial mindset and see themselves as above the rule of law.

One hot tag is threat perception, especially from known terror groups such as al-Qaeda or Lashkar-e-Toiba. The highest Z-plus category accompanies the star label, VVIP.

There is always a rush of supposedly important people wanting to include themselves in a higher risk category that entitles them to personal commandos (referred to as Black Cats due their attire and skill) and escort vehicles.

The commandos mostly function as bouncers fending off private citizens, while the red-beacon, siren-fitted escort vehicles specialize in jumping traffic lights and shooing away nearby vehicles. Anybody driving in Delhi can vouch for this nuisance done in the name of ``security.’’

Another sought after perquisite is allotments at the prime New Delhi bungalow area which are always very reluctantly vacated.

If a minister or political leader dies, families insist (taking even legal recourse) on converting the accommodation into a memorial or museum, while continuing to occupy the same.

Sometimes former Members of Parliament, ministers, retired officials have to be physically evicted along with belongings. Bureaucrats are in a constant wrangle for dual postings to retain official apartments in the national capital.

Indeed, this power list can go on.

Not being touched up, however, remains a high priority. Even if a humble Kalam did not mind, there are others who do.

It is a question of high prestige, after all.

(Siddharth Srivastava is a New Delhi-based journalist. He can be reached at sidsri@yahoo.com)