The stunning security breach in Parliament on Wednesday has not only exposed the porous nature of protocols but has made a mockery of the systems at the new complex which boasts of world-class infrastructure and facilities. In what appears to be a meticulously planned and well-executed move, two persons made their way into the Lok Sabha, jumped into the chamber from the visitors’ gallery and released yellow smoke from canisters that triggered panic and chaos in the House. While this was happening inside, two others, including a woman, did a similar act with canisters outside the Parliament House.
What if the intruders carried canisters filled with poisonous gas, as one MP feared and screamed in the heat of the moment? What if they carried weapons instead of canisters, and went on a shooting spree inside the Lok Sabha? These were the questions that were playing on the minds of citizens as parliamentarians came to terms with the situation.
While the logic of this breach is baffling, because it ran the risk of the intruders being gunned down by security men, the incident sent shock waves across the world and reduced the Home Minister and his team to a laughing stock. Apparently, there was no harm caused to any of the legislators because it turned out to be all smoke, the culprits managed to drive home their point and embarrass the Modi government. The question is, who would be responsible if there was an attack on parliamentarians or the prime minister?
While the breach came as a jolt to the Modi government which has put in place 3-layered security at the premises, it has exposed the fact that the government has not learnt lessons even 22 years after five armed men attacked Parliament leaving 8 security personnel and one gardener dead on December 13, 2001. The government then resolved to tighten all nuts and bolts in security and assured that there would never be a repeat of a terror strike at Parliament. Wednesday’s intrusion was worse because the attackers succeeded in entering the Lok Sabha and executing their plan. The only consolation is that there were no attacks or casualties.
What’s worse is that the security was found napping despite the threat perception on the anniversary of the deadly strike of 2001. Moreover, Khalistani leader Gurpatwant Singh Pannun had earlier threatened an attack by December 13, a statement that should itself be enough to raise the level of security.
How does one explain that there was a basic flaw in even frisking? For example, the duo who entered the premises knew that the footwear was not checked by the security personnel, and hence they decided to hide the canisters inside their shoes. Can such lapses be allowed in Parliament, one that is considered the temple of democracy? Can such security be allowed to pass muster against the backdrop of India losing two of its prime ministers to assassinations?
An attack inside the hallowed precincts of Parliament amplifies the anger against those in power, the only difference this time was that the culprits chose a softer way by dispelling colour from the canisters and chanting slogans “Tana shahi nahi chalegi” (dictatorship will not be accepted).
Barring visitors and sacking the security men on duty will not help to resolve the larger issue. The incident should be another wake-up call. The government must identify flaws in protocols and come up with tighter security systems so that the parliamentarians are not distressed and distracted over their safety when the need is to have their full attention on national issues.
