NaMo Security: Is His Jhansi Speech Or Is It Plain Politics?

By Ram Parekh / INN Live

This is bad. Things are falling apart and the Centre just cannot hold. In a brave new world where all that looked saffron has now been Modi-fied, the UPA's recurrent cock-a-snook jibes run more like statutory warnings on giant billboards. Yet, statutory as they are, they are there unfailingly.      

The latest is the issue of increased security cover for BJP PM nominee Narendra Modi. The rules of the game were the same old ones: The BJP proposed, the government opposed and the voter supposed that both of them were right.
 Now, a little understanding emanating out of togetherness in the quagmire of politics must have allowed the UPA government to give him what the BJP wanted for Modi.  

See, presumption is the fruit of political prodigality. He who holds a parallel I-Day address in a western corner of the nation and he who builds replicas of the Red Fort as podiums to address crowds; must feel like a Prime Minister. And when he does, follow threat perceptions associated therewith.

Now the government said security to a person is given according to his or her threat perception and the cover for Modi has been provided according to his threat perception. Now, if persons can have their threat perceptions, why can't political parties? After all, the resolution demanding PM-level security for Modi was passed by the BJP's parliamentary board. PM-level security for PM-level man - Kit Kat toh banta hai!  

Modi already enjoys Z-plus security and orders have been issued to carry out extra measures at all public functions he attends after the recent serial blasts at his Patna rally. But the government has ruled out Special Protection Group cover for him. According to an Act of Parliament, SPG protection is given only to the Prime Minister, former Prime Ministers and their kin. Now this is what we call lack of progressive thinking. What about future Prime Ministers, ladies and gentlemen?

When the Congress veep tells the crowd how he fears he might also be assassinated like his grandmother and father, those in the government become concerned about his security. And when blasts kill people in his rally and Modi still talks politics skipping any reference to those killed in his speech, the government also skips reference to his security. Too bad.  

Platitudes from the apex court on VIP security are perhaps too boring. On April 4, the Supreme Court had sounded a red alert on the widespread misuse of VIP security, maintaining that it had become "an offensive symbol of our democracy".

And when the court asked cops why they thought the VIPs need security, the joke of the century followed. In January, the Delhi Police, in an affidavit submitted before an apex court bench, said that the security cover provided to top dignitaries was intended to help them take "bold and impartial" decisions. The Bench examining the necessity of security cover to dignitaries, politicians and officials, was both amused and exasperated and asked the Delhi Police counsel to explain how a sentry at the gate helped the protected person take "bold and impartial" decisions. The explanation was never extended.

Now let us come to the crux. When Modi asked people at his rally in Jhansi to not make him the PM but security guard for the country, I swear the government must have decided it then: Why more security guards for an aspiring security guard? Literally.