Event Report

Internal threats to national security have assumed centre-stage in the debates on Indian security. They are arguably more serious than the external threats. They have a pan-Indian presence and are no longer confined to India’s north and north-eastern frontiers. Therefore, tackling these threats is a common concern for the Centre and the States. However, one witnesses that whether it is in the handling of the Mumbai attacks, or in the case of disturbances in Jammu and Kashmir, or the blockade of Manipur by the NSCN (IM) or the lack of coordination between the central paramilitary forces and the state police in naxal areas, the federal nature of the Indian polity has brought forth tensions between the Centre and the concerned States.

In order to deliberate on these complex issues that have serious implications for India’s national security, a roundtable on “Internal Security and Centre-State Relations” was organized by the Internal Security Cluster. It was chaired by Shri N.N. Vohra, Honourable Governor of Jammu and Kashmir and was attended by scholars and practitioners of the strategic community. The welcome address by Shri. N.S Sisodia, Director General IDSA, was followed by presentations of three eminent panelists, Shri. P.R. Chari, Shri. Ved Marwah and Shri. E.N. Rammohan. They addressed the constitutional, institutional and operational aspects of Centre-State relations and dwelt on their implications for internal security.

Constitutional Arrangement

In the deliberations on the constitutional responsibilities for dealing with challenges to internal security, it was emphasized that the following from the clear mandate of Article 355, the ultimate responsibility does lie with the Union Government. Several judgments of the Supreme Court interpreting the relevant constitutional provisions attest to this. However, since the responsibility for maintaining law and order rests with the State governments, there are at least two compelling reasons for involvement of and cooperation with the Union Government. Firstly, several states witnessing internal disturbances are at the nation’s frontiers, and there is a discernible external dimension to the internal security issues. Secondly, there is also a pernicious nexus between domestic miscreants and the international criminal networks. The problem thus requires a combined response in the spirit of collective responsibility. As suggested by the Punchi Commission on Centre-State Relations, some constitutional amendments such as limiting the application of emergency powers to only the affected parts of a State may prove useful in minimizing Centre-State tensions.

Institutional Set-Up

Like the general consensus that the constitutional provisions to deal with internal security challenges were by and large adequate, there was complete agreement also on the fact that the institutions required to implement these provisions had not evolved sufficiently. Lack of political will on the part of the Union as well as States and dynamics of coalition politics prevent the development of appropriate institutional mechanisms. These result in the sub-optimal functioning of the various institutions involved in tackling the challenges. In order to overcome this institutional deficit, several constructive suggestions were made for strengthening the institutional mechanisms such as creation of new institutions such as a National Counterterrorism Centre and reform of existing ones such as the Indian Police Service, among others.

Operational Efficiency

Operational challenges arise mainly from the deployment of forces of the Union in aid of State civil authorities. There are only three instances in the history of independent India of a suo-motu deployment of such forces. In all other instances, the Union forces have been deployed on the request of the States’ concerned. Nevertheless, serious problems happen when a force that is not aware of local customs is deployed to counter insurgency and other kinds of law and order problems. While the need for such forces cannot be denied, it was argued that trained local officers must be involved, especially in conducting interrogations. Moreover, success in such operations will follow from having a blueprint for joint operations and an effective mechanism for coordination between the civil, judicial, police and paramilitary authorities.

Conclusion

Identifying the main challenges to national security faced by the country today as the proxy-war in Jammu and Kashmir, left-wing extremism, insurgencies in the North-East, terrorism by new groups like the Indian Mujahideen and counter-radical organizations, it was urged that political parties at the Centre and in States rise above their political differences to cooperate with each other in tackling these serious challenges. The perils of playing politics with national security were underscored by all participants.

Report prepared by Ms. Gulbin Sultana, Research Assistant, IDSA.

---

Programme

1400 h: Opening Remarks by Shri. N. S. Sisodia, Director General, IDSA

1410 h: Presentation by Shri. P.R. Chari:
Constitutional Aspects of Centre-State Relations and Internal Security

1430 h: Presentation by Shri. Ved Marwah:
Institutional Aspects of Centre-State Relations and Internal Security

1450 h: Presentation by Shri. E.N. Rammohan:
Operational Aspects of Deployment of Central and State Forces in Internal Security

1510 h: Remarks by Shri N.N. Vohra, Hon’ble Governor, Jammu and Kashmir

1540 h: Discussion

1640 h: Concluding Remarks by the Panel

Concept Note

“Issues relating to our internal security (is) an area that requires utmost vigil, sustained and coordinated attention of both Central and State Governments…our success in large measure also depends on the response of the State Governments…a response that is coordinated not only between the affected states but also between the Centre and the States…Internal security is a critical issue which affects the pace and growth of development…..we have a hard task ahead but one that can be and must be achieved with determination and coordinated action…we will only succeed if we are united as a nation in addressing our concerns related to our internal security.”
— Prime Minister Shri.Manmohan Singh at the Chief Ministers Conference on 07 February 2010, quoted in the Punchi Commission Report, March 2010

Internal threats to national security have assumed centre-stage in the debates on Indian security. They are arguably more serious than the external threats. They have a pan-Indian presence and are no longer confined to India’s north and north-eastern frontiers. Therefore, tackling these threats is a common concern for the Centre and the States. The relationship between the Centre and the States needs to be analysed in the context of the following Constitutional provisions relating to the responsibilities of the Centre and the State Governments on matters pertaining to internal security:

Part XVIII of Constitution, Article 355: It shall be the duty of the Union to protect every State against external aggression and internal disturbance and to ensure that the Government of every State is carried on in accordance with the provisions of this Constitution.

Seventh Schedule, Article 246, Union List, 2 A : Deployment of any armed force of the Union or any other force subject to the control of the Union or any contingent or unit thereof in any State in aid of the civil power; powers, jurisdiction, privileges and liabilities of the members of such forces while on such deployment.

Seventh Schedule, Article 246, State List, Item 1: 1. Public order (but not including 3[the use of any naval, military or air force or any other armed force of the Union or of any other force subject to the control of the Union or of any contingent or unit thereof] in aid of the civil power).

Seventh Schedule Article 246, State List, Item 2: Police (including railway and village police) subject to the provisions of entry 2A of List I.] (cited above)

It has been a matter of concern that that Item 1 and 2 of State List have often come in the way of the clear mandate of Article 355 empowering the Centre to act in cases of internal disturbances. The Group of Ministers Report on Reforming the National Security System (2001) also expressed concern regarding the mismatch between increased Central responsibilities and reduced Central powers in the management of internal security, thus adversely impacting the internal security scenario. Whether it is in the handling of the Mumbai attacks, or in the case of disturbances in Jammu and Kashmir, or the blockade of Manipur by the NSCN (IM) or the lack of coordination between the central paramilitary forces and the state police in naxal areas, the federal nature of the Indian polity has brought forth the tensions between the Centre and the concerned States.

Volume V of the Punchi Commission Report (2010) addresses the issue of management of internal security in a federal set-up. With the aim of improving the interface between the Centre and the State with regard to internal security, the Commission made the following recommendations:

1. Maintenance of communal harmony through reinvigoration of the National Integration Council (NIC), coordination between National Forum for Communal Harmony and NIC, engagement with the local media and NGOs

2. Central Law Enforcement Agency for Internal Security to preempt, prevent, control, investigate and prosecute terrorism related crimes, centre-state consensus through consultative mechanisms on “admissibility of confessions made before the police”

3. Suo Motu Deployment of Central Forces to be provided for by a clarificatory amendment of Article 355 to make it functionally viable, along with upholding the spirit of federal supremacy and cooperative federalism (to be ensured through making such deployment with full advance knowledge of the State Government, central rule in limited area of state to manage local emergency, and its use in rarest of rare circumstances)

4. Migration though managed by states well as a law and order issue as well as politically, should be on agenda of the NIC and Centre-State consultations.

5. Other Internal Security Problems of Naxalism, Insurgency in the North East and in Jammu and Kashmir to be addressed by greater emphasis on development and improving the security apparatus (specific recommendations for each issue) and ensuring similarity of objective of the Centre and the concerned States

6. Police Reforms to be implemented as per the directive of the Supreme Court (2006), quarterly reports of the Justice Thomas Committee to oversee implementation of the directive to be submitted to the Home Minister, and discussed bi-annually at the Chief Ministers Conference in Internal Security, budgeting and financial support from Centre

7. Criminal Justice System for management of crime based on new approaches and tools involving all levels of government, a Review and Monitoring Mechanism involving states to go into existing reports and commissions such as Second Administrative Reforms Commission Report (2007), Report of the Committee on Draft National Policy for Criminal Justice (2007), Judicial Impact Assessment Committee Report (2008) etc., creation of a Standing Commission on Internal Security and Criminal Justice, Department of Criminal Justice at Centre and State, Bureau of Crime Prevention, Crime Statistics and Criminal Justice Planning.

This Roundtable seeks to focus on some issues that may facilitate or impede the implementation of these recommendations:

• Legal- Which constitutional reforms are most desirable and feasible for enhanced Centre-State cooperation on matters of internal security?
• Political-Which are the main areas of tension between the Centre and the States or among different states resulting from politicization of security issues? How should these tensions be eased?
• Institutional- What should be done to ensure better coordination between the Centre and the State?
• Operational-What should be done to improve operational efficiency of the police and paramilitary forces deployed in internal security duties?