Sanctity of CoI must be upheld

TNN Bureau. Updated: 5/26/2017 12:43:56 PM Edit and Opinion

The Army Chief’s on-the-spot Commendation Card –which is usually awarded on Republic Day or Independence Day –to a Major who had tied a man Kashmir to jeep has left the public opinion highly divided. A majority of the public is, however, appreciative of the Army’s decision and the government of the present day and the ruling party is fully supportive of it.



There is no doubt that the Army operates in peculiar circumstances in Kashmir and the Major, by his own admission, took this decision in most challenging circumstances, but the Army Chief should have deferred this gesture to a later occasion as a Court of Inquiry was still probing the case. The Court of Inquiry (CoI) has always been the Army’s and government’s pet answer to the allegations of human rights violations but still majority of people have trusted the process. This case raises serious issues of process when an officer whose action is still being examined by a CoI is awarded a Commendation Card by the Chief of the Army Staff.



The CoI cannot help being “influenced” by the recognition, so it could be demanded that the now-pointless probe be immediately wound up: after all the Chief is senior to those conducting it, and in the military system no “junior” dare disagree with the Chief.



As defence minister, Arun Jaitely would do well to bring his legal expertise to bear and opine on the propriety of the Chief’s move: it has implications for all CoIs and in matters involving non-military persons there will be an erosion of confidence in the CoI practice. At the best of times the “uniforms” are known to protect their own. So much for the so called due process.



The specific case of Major Leetul Gogoi, credited with lashing a civilian to an Army jeep on 9 April to serve as a human shield against stone-pelters in Budgam in Kashmir has, justifiably, triggered sharply conflicting views. Critics insist it was indicative of the high-handed manner in which the Army has consistently trampled upon human rights, abused the provisions of the much-condemned Armed Forces Special Powers Act (some aspects of which are now being reviewed by the Supreme Court), and fuels the charge that in Kashmir the Army is part of the problem rather than part of the solution.



The Army takes a diametrically opposite view, and lauds the Major for averting the possibility of bloodshed. To counter public condemnation, the Army activated its vocal retired personnel (among them the chief minister of Punjab, does the Congress party endorse his line?) to project the officer as a hero. As we have already argued that the Major may really have done a heroic deed in the circumstances which people outside the theatre of conflict are now aware of but what about the sanctity of the Court of Inquiry?


Comment on this Story