Amit Shah VS Manish Tewari About Gandhis' Security Cover

Brut India

A "vindictive" move by the Centre, says Congress. You are only bothered about one political family, says BJP. The two parties clash in Parliament on the removal of the Gandhis' top security cover.

Transcript

00:00If the security that was necessary for them had been given to us,

00:04they would have been sitting in our midst today.

00:08Whose concern is it?

00:10Is it the concern of the VIPs, the leaders of the country, or the concern of a family?

01:00In spite of this, on December 4, 1989, it was said

01:29that the SPG cover of the PM was withdrawn.

01:39The former Prime Minister of India, about whom the Intelligence Bureau and every other

01:45instrumentality of this government was getting periodic inputs that his threat was increasing

01:50on a daily basis.

01:53The incident of Shri Priyambhudur, and this is proven by the Verma Commission, this is

02:14also proven by the Jain Commission, that if the former PM had been given the security

02:23that was necessary for him, he would have been sitting in our midst today.

03:04The threat assessment is a perfect science, and the answer to this is negative, and the

03:15answer to this is no.

03:16This whole process of threat assessment is a very subjective process, and there are many

03:31MPs in this assembly who must have had the experience that this threat assessment is

03:40not a scientific and an objective process, but has become a complete political process.

03:48And the SPG was made a status symbol.

03:52The security has not been removed, the security has been changed, and it has been changed

04:01on the basis of threat assessment.

04:04On the basis of threat assessment, their security was covered with ASL and with ambulance throughout

04:12the country.

04:13ASL means that first someone will go and do a threat assessment of the spot, a threat

04:20assessment will be done, he will coordinate with the state governments, and the security

04:24has not been given by the state government.

04:26You have mentioned that the state government has given up its trust.

04:30The CRPF is a central agency, it is present throughout the country, it is present in every

04:36state, and its threat, security has been covered.

04:42But when a Prime Minister or his family is removed from office, the decisions that he

04:51has taken, the people who are harmed because of them, or those who feel that they are harmed,

05:00does that challenge end?

05:04And the answer to this is that the challenge does not end.

05:09Because the people who want to kill someone, they wait for the time when the security cover

05:18is not so tight, and their negative intentions can be fulfilled.

05:29All the former Prime Ministers of India, their families, as long as they are alive,

05:36they should be given security.

05:39For example, as long as Shri Atal Bihari Vajpayee was in our midst, on May 16, 2004, he was

05:47removed from the Prime Minister's post, till 2018, he was given security by the SPG.

05:54According to the Home Minister and the government, my request is that Dalgat should rise above

06:00politics and look at this matter of security.

06:03And just because a person does not remain a Prime Minister, it does not mean that the

06:09threat to him is reduced because of the decisions he has taken while remaining a Prime Minister.

06:15Vindictive approach, vindictive approach, vindictive approach.

06:19Mr. Gaurav Gogai, I would like to tell you through the President that vindictive approach

06:26is not the culture of my party.

06:29The Congress Party has put the whole country in jail many times for vindictive approach.

06:34This is not the culture of my party.

06:37This is not the culture of my party.

Category

Transcript

Recommended