Opinion: Justice KT Thomas on the frisking of Dr. Kalam

This is in continuation to my post Controversy: The frisking of Dr. Kalam at New Delhi airport

Fellow blogger Nebu was kind enough to alert me on an Op-Ed piece in The Hindu of July 25 by Justice KT Thomas about the frisking of Dr. Kalam, on the same day it was published. You can read it at

http://www.hinduonnet.com/2009/07/25/stories/2009072556080900.htm

Most of the points presented in the write-up by the former Justice of the Supreme Court of India are valid. But in my opinion, what he has stated is a personal opinion and not a judicial assessment. And, on certain counts, my views are different.

How Dr. Kalam feels about the incident is not very material. What is important is how the people of India react to it. Egalitarian state does not mean a rank-less society. The Indian protocol concedes ranks and the citizens expect that to be honored. Whether such distinctions are necessary is another matter.

Do we still have hang-ups of the ‘feudal and colonial culture’ as Justice Thomas states? Maybe, yes. But the Indian ethos is quite different from that of a (European) country where the King might bicycle to a downtown bar for an informal meeting with his subjects.

What are the fundamentals involved in this matter? As I see it, the basic questions are:

1. Is there is a valid law in this country that exempts persons of certain category from security checks at airports?

2. If there is such a law, is it not to be enforced?

3. Is an aerobridge at an Indian airport Indian territory or not? This is relevant because the US Transportation Security Administration (TSA) stipulation is that the passengers be subjected to a final security check in the aerobridge. It is not clear to me whether Dr. Kalam was frisked in the aerobridge or in the terminal.

4. Whether one likes the law or not, if it is breached, should not action be taken against the offender?

In my mind, the answer to all these questions is ‘Yes’. If that is right, prompt action should have been taken against those who broke the law of the land.

One can very well understand the compulsions of the Americans. But curtsy never hurt anybody. A little finesse in handling the situation could have minimized the negative impact, though it would have still meant flouting the laws of India.

The TSA reportedly mentioned in their statement about the issue, ‘if required, private screening would be made available to such dignitaries on request’. Why wasn’t that offered to Dr. Kalam?

The answer is: ‘Downright crassness’.