The Supreme Court on Tuesday rejected a PIL seeking audit of intelligence agencies – NTRO (National Technical Research Organisation), Research and Analysis Wing (RAW), Intelligence Bureau (IB) – by the Comptroller and Auditor General. The plea filed by the Centre for Public Interest Litigation had asked for the agencies’ accountability to Parliament.
Dismissing the plea, the Supreme Court refused to tinker with the functioning of the agencies, saying that it could risk the security of the state.
Amar Bhushan, former Special Secretary, Cabinet Secretariat says the apex court may have rejected the PIL in a quandary over whether MPs with divergent views on national issues can be trusted with overseeing covert activities of these agencies. He argues, “despite all their failings, these agencies are still the best bet to hold intelligence secrets.” Instead, he suggests the constitution of a Peer Review Board of retired senior officers who could review all operational, procurement and administrative decisions taken by the officers. Read the article here.
Drawing a comparison with the British and American Congressional/Parliamentary oversight, senior journalist Aditya Sinha says the Supreme Court judgment has “melted away all resistance to encroachment on citizen privacy and civil liberties.” Sinha quotes former R&AW chief AS Dulat to bring home the point – India is not yet ready for legislative oversight, where “things will come out in the public unlike the US.”
Read more: Court’s Order on Intel Agencies Means Snooping Will Continue
Post-Court’s Order: Time Now to Provide Legal Cover to Intelligence Agencies
Arguing for scrutiny and accountability, Vappala Balachandran, former Special Secretary, Cabinet Secretariat says India needs a law to “empower” the intelligence agencies. He cites two primary reasons for this:
- Intelligence agencies need legal protection for doing their secret national security work as they use unconventional methods.
- To prevent abuses by rogue elements among intelligence agencies by misusing secret channels for partisan considerations, which is detrimental to national security.
(At The Quint, we are answerable only to our audience. Play an active role in shaping our journalism by becoming a member. Because the truth is worth it.)