Special Protection Group (SPG): India
This is a collection of articles archived for the excellence of their content. |
Contents |
The enabling legislation
SPG Act, 2019
The SPG (Amendment) Bill that seeks to curtail the number of people to be provided cover by the elite Special Protection Group has been passed by Parliament. Rajya Sabha passed the bill on Tuesday amid walk out by several parties including the Congress. The Bill was passed by Lok Sabha on November 27 with a voice vote.
The Congress has opposed the changes in the SPG Bill.
The party has claimed political vendetta over the government's move. In Rajya Sabha it cited an alleged security breach at the residence of Priyanka Gandhi Vadra, when seven unknown people in a car drove up to the porch of the Congress leader's Lodhi Estate home, got off and walked up to her to ask for photographs, to prove its point.
Here is what the proposed bill is all about and the controversy surrounding it:
The SPG (Amendment) Bill says that Special Protection Group will provide security to the Prime Minister and members of his immediate family residing with him at his official residence.
The bill also provides that SPG will give security to former Prime Minister and his immediate family members residing with him at the residence allotted to him for five years from the date he ceases to hold the office.
What were the provisions of the original Bill:
The Special Protection Group (SPG) was raised with the intention to provide proximate security cover to the Prime Minister, former Prime Ministers and their immediate family members.
The Special Protection Group Act, 1988 was enacted to provide for the constitution and regulation of the SPG as an armed force of the Union for providing proximate security to the Prime Minister and his immediate family members.
Previous amendments to the Bill:
The Act was amended in 1991, 1994, 1999 and 2003 to extend SPG cover to former prime ministers and their immediate family members also, for different periods of time from the day the Prime Minister demitted office.
It was last amended in 2003 to extend the SPG cover to former Prime Ministers and their immediate family members for one year from demitting of office of prime minister and thereafter based on the level of threat periodically assessed by security agencies.
Why is the Congress opposing the changes to the SPG Bill:
The Centre's move has been strongly opposed by the Congress which claims that the government is targeting the Gandhi family.
The Centre last month replaced the SPG (Special Protection Group) cover of the family of former Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi, assassinated by LTTE terrorists on May 21, 1991, with 'Z-plus' security provided by the Central Reserve Police Force.
What is the government's response to Congress's charges:
Union home minister Amit Shah denied any vindictive action in the change of security of the Gandhis and said the security of Congress president Sonia Gandhi and her children Rahul and Priyanka have not been withdrawn but changed to 'Z-plus' with ambulance.
Government says Gandhis have travelled without SPG several times:
Amit Shah said after 2015, Rahul Gandhi has travelled 1,892 times in India and 247 times abroad without informing the SPG.
Govt said Sonia Gandhi had travelled 50 times in Delhi, 13 times in various parts of India and 29 times abroad without informing the SPG.
Priyanka Gandhi had travelled 339 times in Delhi without taking the SPG cover, 64 times in different parts of the country and 94 times abroad, Amit Shah said.
Prime Minister’s security
How the Prime Minister’s security is planned
Deeptiman Tiwary, January 7, 2022: The Indian Express
How is the Prime Minister’s security planned?
Planning of the PM’s security during any visit is an elaborate exercise that involves both central agencies and state police forces. Broad guidelines are laid down in what is called the SPG’s ‘Blue Book’.
Three days before any planned visit, the Special Protection Group (SPG), which is responsible for the PM’s security, holds a mandatory Advance Security Liaison (ASL) with everyone involved in securing the event, including SPG officials, Intelligence Bureau (IB) officials in the state concerned, state police officials, and the district magistrate concerned.
Every minute detail of the visit and required security arrangements are discussed among the officials. Once the meeting is over, an ASL report is prepared, and it is signed by all those who attended. Based on this report, all security arrangements are made.
What is chalked out during the meeting?
Generally, a PM’s visit is supposed to be planned out to the very last detail, and the itinerary that is planned thereafter is expected to stick to it.
Thus, the meeting discusses how the PM would arrive (by air, road, or rail) and, once he lands, how he would reach the venue of his programme (generally by helicopter or road). In planning this, intelligence inputs of central agencies and the local intelligence unit are taken into consideration.
Then the security of the venue — which involves aspects such as entry and exit, frisking of those coming to the venue, and placing of door frame metal detectors — is discussed. The structural stability of the dais is checked as well. (There have been incidents of the stage at public meetings collapsing while leaders are on it.)
“Fire safety of the venue is also audited. Even the weather report for the day is taken into consideration. If the PM is likely to take a boat to reach any place, the functional readiness and safety of the boat is authorised on a certificate.
“If there are bushes on the route the PM is likely to take, the SPG may ask them to be cut down. Narrow patches of the route are mapped, and more men are asked to be posted there for route security,” a senior police officer who has managed the security of multiple visits by Prime Minister Narendra Modi told The Indian Express.
What happens if plans change suddenly?
A contingency plan is always made in advance. That is why, sources said, the weather report is taken into consideration. “What if because of bad weather, the PM can’t fly to the venue. So an alternative route by road is planned in advance, the route sanitised and security placed on the road even if the PM is supposed to fly. You can’t arrange security at the last minute,” the officer said.
This, in fact, can happen quite often, sources said. A helicopter requires a visibility of at least 1,000 metres to fly safely, which is sometimes a constraint.
“A lot of times during winter, the PM has to take the road because of fog. Those routes are planned and secured in advance. If for any reason the route is found to be not clear, the state police does not give the go-ahead. The visit is cancelled,” the officer said.
“The SPG only provides proximate security to the PM. When the PM is travelling to any state, it is the responsibility of the state police to ensure overall security. They have the responsibility of intelligence gathering, route clearance, venue sanitisation, and crowd management,” former UP DGP O P Singh, who has also served with the SPG, said.
Central intelligence agencies are responsible for providing inputs about any threat to security. However, it is the SPG that takes the final call on how the PM’s security is to be arranged. Sources said the SPG never allows the PM’s movement until the local police gives the go-ahead. Sources said the state police are also supposed to conduct anti-sabotage checks and to secure the route by placing not only men on the roads but also snipers on rooftops.
The state police also provide a pilot vehicle that leads the PM’s cavalcade and, if the PM is likely to stay at a place, an officer of the level of superintendent of police (SP) is deputed as camp commandant to ensure security.
What happens during public events where the PM is expected to go close to crowds of people?
During public meetings, rallies, and road shows, apart from policemen, an SP-level officer is deputed to post men in plainclothes for security.
“During rallies, leaders do not want to be surrounded by uniformed men. But the leaders also can’t be left to be on their own. So men in plainclothes, sometimes even masquerading as party workers, are deputed,” another officer said.
Sources said that in political events the political team of the PM, or even the PM personally, can put pressure on his security personnel to deviate from protocol. “But that’s the time the SPG has to take a stand and say no if it is not sure of ensuring security,” a former SPG chief said.
Former Maharashtra DGP Sanjeev Dayal, during his tenure as SPG chief, had famously delayed then Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee’s cavalcade by more than half an hour during his 1999 Lahore visit.
“Dayal was not sure of the route clearance given by local police there (in Pakistan) to reach Lahore fort. He wanted some crowds en route to be cleared. The diplomats were putting pressure on Dayal to let the PM go as it was such an important event. But Dayal stood his ground and did not allow the PM to leave until the crowds had been cleared,” said the former SPG chief.
But what if there are spontaneous or unexpected protests that have not been anticipated during the planning?
The sources said protests are always a threat to any VIP’s visit and thus, elaborate advance planning factors in ways for the state police to thwart them. Generally, local intelligence has inputs on which groups are planning a protest, and preventive action is taken.
“There is list of suspicious people or potential protesters with the local police. They are picketed in advance. Both physical and electronic surveillance is mounted to gather information on such surprises. If there is a planned protest that cannot be stalled, then the route is avoided,” the officer said.
SPG vs Z+ security: the difference
The Congress must bring widespread reforms across all levels of the organisation to show it is no longer in a state of inertia and to present itself as a viable political alternative to the BJP, party veteran Kapil Sibal said.
Sibal, who was among the G-23 leaders whose letter to Congress president Sonia Gandhi last year demanding a meaningful overhaul of the party had triggered a storm, hoped the organisational polls, recently postponed in the wake of the Covid-19 pandemic, will “happen sooner than later”.
In an exclusive interview to PTI, the former union minister acknowledged that at present there is no strong political alternative to the BJP but said that Prime Minister Narendra Modi has lost the moral authority to rule and the Congress can present an alternative due to the current mood in the country.
He also noted that while forming committees to review election losses is good, it will have no impact unless remedies suggested are implemented.
Noting that the party's alliances with the All India United Democratic Front (AIUDF) in Assam and Indian Secular Front (ISF) in West Bengal were “not thought through”, Sibal said the Congress has failed to drive home the point that minority and majority communalism are equally dangerous for the country.
He cited this as one of the reasons for the poor performance of the party in recent assembly polls.
Amid defections of young leaders – Jyotiraditya Scindia and now Jitin Prasada – to the BJP, the former minister said “there is an urgent need to strike a balance between experience and youth.”
He has earlier said that from “aaya ram, gaya ram politics, it has come to "prasada politics now” and asked whether Jitin will get the 'prasada' from the BJP, suggesting that leaders were moving out of the party to serve their political interests.
“At present, there is definitely a void in terms of a strong political alternative. It is exactly in this context, that I had given suggestions for some reforms in my party so that the country has a strong and credible opposition.
"But what comes out of it is not something for me to foretell. But I am sure, a time will come when the people of this country will decide what is good for them,” Sibal told PTI.
The veteran added that India needs a resurgent Congress and the party needs to rope in the right people to drive its poll strategy so that it can build upon the failures of the government.
“Victory of non-BJP parties in recent assembly elections has shown the chinks in the BJP's armour in terms of its vulnerability to losing when faced with a stronger opposition,” he said.
“India needs a resurgent Congress. But for that, the party needs to show that it is active, present, aware and is in the mood to engage meaningfully.
"For this to happen, we will need to have widespread reforms at the organisational hierarchy both at the central and state levels to show that the party is still a force to reckon with and is no longer in a state of inertia,” he said.
Exuding hope in the grand old party's resurgence at a time of newly emerging political equations across India, Sibal said that despite a poor showing of the Congress electorally, the current mood in the country provides an opportunity for it to emerge as a viable alternative, owing to the party's pan-India presence.
“The Modi government's inept handling of the pandemic and the resultant anguish among people across the country needs to be channelised.
"The Congress has to take it upon itself to provide an alternative roadmap in the nation's interest and I am sure, we will emerge victorious in this enterprise,” he said just two days after strategist Prashant Kishor met NCP chief Sharad Pawar in Mumbai, triggering speculation of a potential third front.
Asked if the Congress had learnt its lessons from the Antony committee report after the 2014 Lok Sabha debacle, Sibal said the party had not been able to stress that all forms of communalism were dangerous. “The Antony committee set up by Congress chief Sonia Gandhi soon after the 2014 Lok Sabha elections had rightly pointed out that fighting the polls on secularism versus communalism plank hurt the Congress that was identified as pro-minority, resulting in substantial electoral gains for the BJP.
"More importantly the Congress also failed to drive home the point that minority and majority communalism were equally dangerous for the country. In my view, the decision to ally with All India United Democratic Front (AIUDF) in Assam and Indian Secular Front (ISF) in Bengal was not thought through,” said Sibal.
When pointed out that he had sought urgent party elections in the letter to Sonia Gandhi and if he agreed with the postponement of the exercise, Sibal said, “On January 22, the CWC had met to discuss the schedule for electing the new party chief in May. It was deferred by a month owing to the Assembly polls.
"The exercise is on hold at the moment because of the pandemic. I do hope it happens sooner rather than later.”
The former union minister welcomed the constitution of a committee to review the party's recent losses in West Bengal, Kerala, Assam and Puducherry, but added a caveat, “Setting up committees to analyse the reasons for any electoral debacle is welcome but unless the remedies suggested are accepted and acted upon, it will have no impact on the ground.”
The panel headed by former Maharashtra chief minister Ashok Chavan has handed over its report to Sonia Gandhi with its recommendations, which the party will discuss internally.
History of usage
1980s to Nov 2019
Nov 28, 2019: The Times of India
Gandhis’ security not compromised: Shah
TIMES NEWS NETWORK
New Delhi:
The passage of the bill to amend the SPG Act was marked by sharp political exchanges in Lok Sabha, with home minister Amit Shah accusing Congress of being bothered about its first family’s status rather than an objective security assessment amid the opposition party’s accusations of political vendetta.
The minister said the Gandhis had violated SPG guidelines repeatedly, often travelling abroad without cover, and wondered what could be the reason. Though he did not name the person, he said a member of the Gandhi family was in the habit of driving expensive motorbikes in central Delhi, leaving his cover to keep pace.
He asked why the Gandhi family (Sonia, Rahul and Priyanka) travelled abroad over 600 times without taking SPG into the loop over the years.
The Congress charged that Prime Minister Modi violated security considerations when he took a ride on a sea-plane at the end of the campaign for 2017 Gujarat polls
Earlier, Congress leader Manish Tewari said the reason to remove SPG protection is that ‘number of individuals to be provided SPG cover can potentially become quite large’. Same reason was given to remove security cover of Rajiv Gandhi. The SPG protectees were told in June [2019] that threat assessment was increasing, but has changed since, he added.
Sharing specifics, Shah said Rahul Gandhi had travelled 1,892 times in India and 247 times abroad without informing SPG after 2015. Similarly, Sonia Gandhi had travelled 50 times in Delhi, 13 times in various parts of India and 29 times abroad without informing SPG while Priyanka Gandhi had travelled 339 times in Delhi, 64 times within the country and 94 times abroad without SPG cover, he added.
The new Act will restrict cover to PMs in office and their proximate families in the official residence. This cover will end five years after demitting office.”
Taking a dig at Congress members, the home minister asked why didn’t they utter a word when SPG security cover was withdrawn from former PMs Chandra Shekhar, I K Gujral, P V Narasimha Rao and Manmohan Singh.
Noting that the bill is not being amended for the first time but was done in 1991, 1994, 1999 and 2003 as well, he said all those amendments were, however, made keeping “one family in mind”.
Withdrawal of SPG cover
2019: The Gandhi family
Bharti Jain, Nov 9, 2019: The Times of India
From: Bharti Jain, Nov 9, 2019: The Times of India
While the Gandhis’ SPG cover was withdrawn by the government on Friday, sources said there have been several instances when each of the three members of the Gandhi family — Sonia, Rahul and Priyanka — failed to cooperate with the SPG by choosing to travel in non-bullet-resistant vehicles and undertook foreign visits unaccompanied by officers, often informing the force of their plans at the eleventh hour.
Their new Z-plus security cover by CRPF will be similar to that provided to VIPs like home minister Amit Shah.
The SPG was set up in 1985 with the purpose of protecting the Prime Minister. The force was conceptualised in the wake of Indira Gandhi’s assassination. While SPG Act originally covered only the PM and immediate family, it has since been amended from time to time. Ex-PMs and their kin were made eligible for the first time in 1991.
Sources indicated a proposal to limit eligibility for SPG — a highly-trained force that is self-sufficient with its own high-tech equipment and aids including cars like BMWs and sophisticated arms, and also with statutory backing to make the state police conform to its requirements — was initiated in 2012-13 itself. The justification for trimming was that since SPG is expensive, it needs to factor in every contingency including terror threats and cannot leave anything to chance, and weeding out as many protectees as possible would gear the force to the task of protecting those with the highest threat perception, such as the PM.
“I am not privy to the sensitive inputs (on threat perception of the Gandhis) and cannot comment except that in the perception of security and intelligence agencies, their threat quotient has gone down to the extent that such a removal is warranted,” Yashovardhan Azad, a former IPS officer, said.
Sources in the CRPF said takeover of the Gandhi family’s security from SPG may easily take a week to 10 days, with SPG likely to help out with men and material, including cars and jammers that are not readily available with CRPF. “A joint security review by officials of SPG, CRPF, IB and Delhi Police will be held soon to assess details relating to the takeover,” said an officer.
The officer said the transition of the Gandhis’ security detail from SPG to CRPF could mean fewer personnel, possibly fewer and less fancy vehicles (though two BMWs were sanctioned for CRPF in Manmohan Singh’s case), relatively less sophisticated arms and higher dependence on state police during the Gandhis’ visits outside Delhi.
In 1988, the SPG Act was passed extending protection of the force to only the PM, an office then occupied by Rajiv Gandhi. Rajiv’s cover was withdrawn when the V P Singh government took over in 1989. However, when the former was killed by an LTTE suicide bomber in 1991, the P V Narasimha Rao government amended the SPG Act to include ex-PMs and their kin as eligible protectees for 10 years after demitting office.
