Upgrad
LCI Learning

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

Raj Kumar Makkad (Adv P & H High Court Chandigarh)     19 June 2010

TRACING ACTS OF TERROR

The public inquiry by a retired Canadian supreme court judge John Major into the explosion aboard Air India Fight 182 over the Irish Sea in June 1985, which was released on Friday, may appear to serve no purpose. The tragedy occurred 25 years ago. There were no survivors— 328 Indians died. The culprits — Sikh terrorists — have been punished.

 

But the Canadian government and the public felt the need to know whether something could have been done to foil the terrorists' diabolical plan. The answer that judge Major has given is that the Canadian Mounted Police (CMP) and the Canadian Security and Intelligence Service (CSIS) had enough actionable intelligence to prevent the disaster, and that the two agencies could not act because they did not share the information that each one of them had. Does it sound familiar?

 

This was indeed more or less the conclusion that the Subrahmanyam committee had arrived at in its inquiry into the Kargil fiasco. There was no coordination among the different intelligence agencies, it said. It should perhaps lead to the conclusion that governmental agencies are universally inert and inept. The conclusion should not come as a surprise. But it is necessary to determine the facts that led to failure. Major's report should alert both governments and the public that terror attacks can be foiled if information that is available with the different agencies is put together and used. The lessons are not lost because of the lapse of time, in this case 25 years.

 

In India we have a tradition of commissions of inquiry in many of the major disasters, but very rarely are these reports made public and discussed. The Ranganath commission which inquired into the anti-Sikh riots in Delhi in October 1984 in the wake of the assassination of Indira Gandhi did not dwell on whether timely deployment of forces could have prevented the massacre. There is the Srikrishna commission on the communal riots in Mumbai but there has been no public discussion about it. Similarly, the Liberhan commission on the demolition of Babri Masjid in December 1992 does not say whether the state and central governments could have taken timely action.

 

Unfortunately, no commission of inquiry has looked into the causes of the lethal gas leak at the Union Carbide plant in Bhopal in December 1984. There has been no inquiry into the post-Godhra riots in Gujarat in 1992. The conclusions would bring home the painful truth of where governments failed. It is a necessary first step to sit up and take note, and plug the loopholes.

 



Learning

 3 Replies

Baskaran Kanakasabai (entrepreneur)     20 June 2010

 Dear Sir

Thats well cited. Two  good examples of good  enquiry reports and many good examples of ineffective or useless enquiry reports and the lesson to learn, for the governments.

Air India Fight 182  explosion over the Irish Sea in June 1985:

Hon.Judge John Major reported that the CMP and the CSIS had enough actionable intelligence to prevent the disaster, and that the two agencies could not act because they did not share the information that each one of them had.

Kargil fiasco:

Subrahmanyam committee reported that there was no coordination among the different intelligence agencies involved.

There is another legal mishap which happens year after year for the last 100 plus years and over which no enquiry has ever been conducted;the cumulative quantum of damage of the recurring  mishap is larger than that of many of the other enquired mishaps put together.

The legal mishap is:

" The declaration of alienation of title of land occuring after 4(1) notification under LA, as void by the courts of India"

This mishap too is caused by the lack of coordination between two agencies of the same government, viz.,

The LAO and the ROD. If such notification is conveyed to the Registrar and registered in his books so as to forbid alienation of titles after notification, such mishaps, which have resulted in tens of thousands of people getting deprived of their fundamental right to property( which is  sum total of their life-time earnings), could have been prevented. That's because of the Flaw in the Law, refered to in my presentation.

 

Even after communicating the discovery of this flaw to the Govt through a presentation with comparisons and contrasts from different versions of the same law from various countries of the world, if the govt  does not acknowledge even receipt of such a report,  even after two months,what is the alternative for the responsible citizens like us?

PIL: straight at the doors of the Supreme Court. Had I been a lawyer, I would have straight away done that landing  the jabs of arguments on the due faces?

What ever is feasible on my part, I have done. Preparing a detailed presentation extending to over 500 pages and conveying that to various honourable persons from the President to the Law minister, from the Law commission to the Human Rights Commission. What else I can do?

If a responsible lawyer of substance and sayer of sense, like yourself, takes up the matter and launches a PIL, I can back him up in all respects under my capacity to ensure that justice and sense prevail.

Otherwise, I am beginning to doubt the efficacy of voicing valid views and suggesting practicable solutions in platforms as we do now!

Your views please!

Raj Kumar Makkad (Adv P & H High Court Chandigarh)     21 June 2010

You have done marvolous job and nothing more is required from your side. I appreciate your active efforts and aspect similar activities from your part as and when required in the interest of India.

Baskaran Kanakasabai (entrepreneur)     21 June 2010

Dear Sir

Thanks very much for your reply.

Kindly let me know your views about forming a team of interested lawyers(if needed) or entrusting the job to one competent lawyer to file a PIL and conducting  the case in the Supreme Court.

Though I am not well off  financially, in order to serve a good public cause, I can even try to bear the expenses involved in filing such  a PIL, considering it as my little bit of contribution to my country.

I can be listed as a petitioner for public cause.

Kindly let me know your views, please. Also, kindly let me know as to whether it will be suitable for yourself to take up that job. Also kindly let me know as to whether such a PIL can be e-filed with the SC.

Sincerely,

Baskaran Kanakasabai


Leave a reply

Your are not logged in . Please login to post replies

Click here to Login / Register