SPG should not and cannot secure Modi

BJP’s demand for SPG protection for its PM candidate is legally flawed. In any case, mere SPG status without local intel support won’t avert a Patna or worse

rohit

Rohit Bansal | November 7, 2013


Narendra Modi
Narendra Modi

Truth be told, the special protection group (SPG), viciously called as ‘Sonia Protection Group,’ was indeed a creation of the Gandhis. Its need was felt after the Delhi police failed to protect Indira Gandhi on October 31, 1984. Hence the strong imprint of Rajiv Gandhi, her son and successor, and the near-personal allegiance to the family rooted in the force’s DNA.

This only got accentuated when Rajiv was killed in May 1991. Having ceased to be PM, he was devoid of SPG protection at the time of his assassination.

Changes in the SPG Act (1991, 1994, 1999, 2003) expanded the ambit to include former PMs and their immediate family.

But everything only strengthened the cultural paradigm and bonds of SPG as a force for the family.

The last amendment, effected by Atal Bihari Vajpayee in March 2003, gave a former PM and his or her immediate family ‘protectee status’, “for a period of one year from the date on which the former Prime Minister ceased to hold office and beyond one year based on the level of the threat as decided by the central government, so however that not more than twelve months shall elapse between two consecutive assessments made in regard to the need for proximate security.”

This meant two things. First, the Gandhi family, then nowhere near recapturing power that it did in May 2004, would be on an annual dole of sorts.

Second, Vajpayee and any future PM could year-on-year exclude a zoo of ex PMs from the ‘protectee list’ affording them then Z or Z+ security, instead, which essentially involves one of the paramilitary forces (National Security Guard in the case of Z+).

Hence my three suggestions to Modi bhaktas now demanding SPG protection for their god:

1. The force, under the Act, can’t be deployed for ‘declared prime ministerial candidates,’ irrespective of the merits of the threat perception on their lives. The Act isn’t cast in stone; but it surely needs an Ordinance to name Modi (and any others who will claim similar status as declared PM candidates of their own party!). Normally mature BJP spokesperson Piyush Goyal tweeted invoking US-system where a declared presidential candidate immediately gets Secret Service cover, but this is not applicable in a political system where Nitish Kumar, Naveen Patnaik, Mamta Banerjee, J Jayalalithaa and/or Mayawati are also the ‘declared PM candidate’ of their motley crowd. In fact, if Goyal’s logic were to be rewound, who could have foreseen Manmohan Singh as the future PM or given him advance SPG protection?

2. Continued SPG cover to Vajpayee is a difficult and emotive issue. The obvious question will be why give an annual extension of protectee status to a former PM who hasn’t been seen in public for the last 6-7 years. Questions on Robert Vadra, the controversial son-in-law of Sonia Gandhi, strutting around with SPG protection will be linked to Vajpayee and his foster family, including the not-so-uncontroversial son-in-law Ranjan Bhattacharyya, enjoying an utterly unnecessary cover.

3. SPG isn’t just a status symbol. For it to be effective, it requires deep support on the ground from local police and intelligence operations where the protectee is travelling. This is where mere lip-service of SPG protection (via an Ordinance!) to Modi is a non-starter. If the state police and intel offer him the lacklustre cover that Nitish Kumar did in Bihar, what will SPG do except provide him an inner ring without any help from the outside?

Tailpiece: Vajpayee was to address a large rally in Lucknow. The SPG DIG, who told me the story, came in the advance party and saw that the state police was woefully short of metal detectors. Failing to convince the local administration that each person in the crowd must pass through a metal detector, he put his foot down and threatened to invoke the Blue Book and cancel the PM’s visit. The administration balked and immediately promised the DIG that the hundreds of metal detecting frames he wanted installed would be commissioned overnight. The PM came, spoke and went. But just as the DIG was leaving, the local police chief smiled and mentioned, “Sir, those hundreds of ‘detectors’ you saw the crowds pass through were basic chaukhats (door frames) we procured from the neighbouring carpenters! Nothing more!”

So much for SPG protection without the support of local police and intel.

 

 

Comments

 

Other News

₹5,000 crore saved from suspected financial fraud

In a significant gain for citizen protection in the digital economy, the Department of Telecommunications (DoT) has helped prevent suspected cyber fraud losses of more than ₹5,000 crore through its Financial Fraud Risk Indicator (FRI) within fifteen months of its launch on May 22, 2025. This money did

Capital acquisition proposals worth Rs 1.10 lakh crore for defence forces cleared

The Defence Acquisition Council (DAC), under the chairmanship of Raksha Mantri Rajnath Singh, on Monday accorded Acceptance of Necessity (AoN), that is, in-principle administrative approval to various acquisition proposals of the defence forces at an estimated cost of about Rs 1,10,000 crore.

How Rafi, Raj Kapoor helped pave the way for a great uranium deal

There`s a certain moment in diplomacy that`s too personal to be captured in a communiqué, too small to make the front page, but more revealing than the front page. This week, prime minister Narendra Modi reached Tashkent and, amid the pomp of state visits, managed to evoke the old Bollywood tunes

Distinguishing Fish 1 and Fish 2: The pragmatism behind India’s WTO ratification

 India became the 123rd WTO member to ratify the multilateral Agreement on Fisheries subsidies (AoFS) when it deposited the Instrument of Acceptance for Phase 1 on July 20, 2026. The ratification is restricted to disciplining Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated fishing (IUU), protection for overfished

The 7% growth problem: Why the next 7% will be harder

India has become accustomed to hearing the 7% growth number. It is now less a milestone than an expectation. Yet the paradox is becoming clearer: maintaining 7% growth may be considerably harder than achieving it once. India’s real GDP grew 7.7% in FY2025–26, following growth of 6.5% in FY202

The Constitution cannot be altered: Justice Abhay Oka

Justice Abhay Oka, who retired from the Supreme Court in May 2025, has said that the Constitution of India cannot be altered. Explaining the landmark Kesavananda Bharati judgment (1973) on the basic structure of the Constitution, he said, “This is one judgment that has saved democracy in India.&rdq

Upcoming Conferences



-->

Archives

Current Issue

Opinion

Facebook Twitter Google Plus Linkedin Subscribe Newsletter

Twitter