From correspondents in India, 08:30 AM IST

India's home ministry, which is concerned with internal security issues, is currently having a re-look at the VIP security system. Under consideration during the exercise is a proposal to make VIPs pay for their own security, fully or partially. There are people feel it is about time this is done.

Providing state security to 'very important persons' whose security is a matter of national or state concern is an accepted state function. The memory of what the nation faced when a member of her own security outfit killed prime minister Indira Gandhi in 1984 is still fresh. Twenty-odd years on, the nation is yet to come to terms with the aftermath and trauma of that event. More recent is the stark reality of the terrorist attack on India's Parliament in Dec 2001.

A people's representative, be it a member of parliament or of a legislative assembly, a chief minister or one holding a public office, often compromises his or her personal safety in order to carry out the business of government. There is no doubt that the lives of public personalities - especially the likes of Sonia Gandhi and L.K. Advani, the Gandhi offspring Priyanka and Rahul, and present or former prime ministers and their kith and kin, can often be at grave risk. Many figure on hit lists of terrorists; others have received oral or written threats from fringe elements, even from cranks whose threats cannot be ignored.

The fact that a public functionary's job involves functions and decision-making in the public interest that cannot possibly please both the 'pro' and the 'against' elements is reason enough to render him potentially vulnerable. Hence the need to put in place all possible security measures to safeguard against violent attacks.

With the advent of terrorism, it is also true that even the ordinary citizen in India has become security conscious. Somewhere down the line, the realisation has dawned that society's primary security provider - the police - is really not in a position to give protection to all the people individually at all times. A fine distinction is emerging between the concepts of 'security for individuals per se' and the overall umbrella of 'collective security' which the police are responsible for.

Politicians constitute the biggest chunk of the 'endangered lot'. Security to them has to be provided not just when in power but also after they have demitted office. The threat could often be on account of the politician's own misdeeds (deliberate or otherwise...) or his criminal record, which is not uncommon in India.

Security is provided on the basis of threat perception supposedly assessed by intelligence agencies, but this, the public feels, is often doctored to provide the individual higher security than he actually needs. There is also a category of persons for whom gun-toting commandos and a VIP red light on the hood of the armoured car is a status symbol - it adds to the person's aura, again depending on what kind of proximity he enjoys with the powers that be to get his way.

When the list of security-seekers extends to every sundry politician to bureaucrat, his kith and kin and socialites and activists, the business of 'keeping VIPs safe' becomes a drain on the national exchequer. If a majority of this lot were made to pay from their pocket that would make a more realistic assessment of the threat.

The ordinary citizen here considers himself equally vulnerable today and hence the feeling why the state's resources should be concentrated on

protecting only a few worthies at his expense?

Out of Delhi Police's (DP) overall strength of 60,000 personnel, only 20,000 are deployed in police stations directly to protect and police 15 million people in Delhi's nine districts. Against this, consider the fact that over 7,000 policemen from DP's security unit today provide security to 350 worthies - a figure that not too long ago stood at over 700.

More personnel from DP's armed battalions are deputed to meet the ministry's additional orders to provide security cover to persons outside this list too. The 'worthies' are assessed for the type of security to be provided - from the low grade 'X' to 'Y' class to the Z, Z+ and Z++ category depending on the threat perception.

And personnel from the country's central paramilitary forces - around 2,000 in number - are at Delhi Police's disposal to guard VIP residences in addition to the security personnel deployed. The Special Protection Group that primarily guards the prime minister, former prime ministers and their family members has over the years grown from 800 personnel in 1985 to 3,000 - and yet reportedly understaffed to meet security demands.

Other central forces like the Indo-Tibetan Border Police and the Central Reserve Police Force are also hard-pressed because of VIP duty. Colossal amounts of taxpayers' money goes into the security paraphernalia which guard these VIPs, most of whom, it is felt, can afford to pay for their security.

It is hoped the home ministry's move crystallises around realistic state security - to provide it only to the highest offices in the country and to those who've come under actual threat in the discharge of their official duties, and not to pseudo, devious or pompous status-seekers.

A concurrent move of the central government to create an exclusive force for VIP security may be an answer. This may take care of security for various individuals whose lives are under threat and relieve other government security agencies of the huge burden off their back - and thereby help them concentrate on police's main function of preventing and detecting crime.

In the process, it would be necessary to train the proposed outfit to deal with problems concerning VIP security, including how to carry out their duties with minimum disturbance or inconvenience to the public, especially during VIP movements.

(Maxwell Pereira is a former joint commissioner of Delhi Police. He can be reached at mfjpkamath@gmail.com)

(Staff Writer, © IANS)