<p class="bodytext">The Indian parliament saw a very serious breach of its security on Wednesday when two persons jumped into the main hall from the visitor’s gallery and released an unknown gas from canisters they had reportedly hidden in their shoes. Two other persons protested outside Parliament House. The intruders, other protesters, and their accomplices, have been arrested but the gravity of the breach should not be overlooked. The lives and health of Members of Parliament would have been in danger if the intruders had released a poisonous gas or had otherwise sought to cause hurt and damage. It is clear that the security checks at Parliament House were far from satisfactory. Persons carrying objects should never have been allowed inside and it is clear that frisking and other measures were inadequate. There were complaints about the security system in the new parliament building and they have come true within weeks of its opening. </p>.Lok Sabha security breach: Pune-based advocate Asim Sarode to render legal help to accused Amol Shinde.<p class="bodytext">It is ironic that the incident happened on the anniversary of the 2001 terrorist attack on parliament and hours after parliament, led by Prime Minister Narendra Modi, had paid homage to security personnel who had died during that attack. There was even an alert for the occasion, especially after the US-based Khalistan leader Gurpatwant Singh Pannun had warned of an attack before or on December 13. That the so-called special security blanket thrown in and around parliament was so easily breached by the intruders is an indictment of the entire police, security and intelligence services responsible for the protection of parliament. What has come to light is that the strict security enforcement system put in place after the 2001 attack has since become weak. The government has unnecessarily imposed severe restrictions on journalists who visit parliament for reporting its proceedings. But it has left the real chinks in the security system open. Every aspect of security, including the issue of passes, needs to be reviewed and a fool-proof system evolved. It is shameful that parliament, which is the most important institution of democracy, is so vulnerable. An issue of email password-sharing was recently claimed to pose a security threat to parliament and was used to expel TMC MP Mahua Moitra. A pass-related issue has now actually threatened its security. </p>.<p class="bodytext">This was not a terrorist attack, but a serious breach of security. Investigations have not so far led to any terrorist links. But it has brought to light the reality that terrorists could also have penetrated security in the same manner, with frightening consequences. While these concerns should be addressed, it should also be noted that the protesters had complaints about the unresponsiveness of the government to the Manipur situation, unemployment in the country, authoritarianism and denial of their constitutional rights. They chose the wrong way to highlight them, but these are concerns many others would share with them.</p>
<p class="bodytext">The Indian parliament saw a very serious breach of its security on Wednesday when two persons jumped into the main hall from the visitor’s gallery and released an unknown gas from canisters they had reportedly hidden in their shoes. Two other persons protested outside Parliament House. The intruders, other protesters, and their accomplices, have been arrested but the gravity of the breach should not be overlooked. The lives and health of Members of Parliament would have been in danger if the intruders had released a poisonous gas or had otherwise sought to cause hurt and damage. It is clear that the security checks at Parliament House were far from satisfactory. Persons carrying objects should never have been allowed inside and it is clear that frisking and other measures were inadequate. There were complaints about the security system in the new parliament building and they have come true within weeks of its opening. </p>.Lok Sabha security breach: Pune-based advocate Asim Sarode to render legal help to accused Amol Shinde.<p class="bodytext">It is ironic that the incident happened on the anniversary of the 2001 terrorist attack on parliament and hours after parliament, led by Prime Minister Narendra Modi, had paid homage to security personnel who had died during that attack. There was even an alert for the occasion, especially after the US-based Khalistan leader Gurpatwant Singh Pannun had warned of an attack before or on December 13. That the so-called special security blanket thrown in and around parliament was so easily breached by the intruders is an indictment of the entire police, security and intelligence services responsible for the protection of parliament. What has come to light is that the strict security enforcement system put in place after the 2001 attack has since become weak. The government has unnecessarily imposed severe restrictions on journalists who visit parliament for reporting its proceedings. But it has left the real chinks in the security system open. Every aspect of security, including the issue of passes, needs to be reviewed and a fool-proof system evolved. It is shameful that parliament, which is the most important institution of democracy, is so vulnerable. An issue of email password-sharing was recently claimed to pose a security threat to parliament and was used to expel TMC MP Mahua Moitra. A pass-related issue has now actually threatened its security. </p>.<p class="bodytext">This was not a terrorist attack, but a serious breach of security. Investigations have not so far led to any terrorist links. But it has brought to light the reality that terrorists could also have penetrated security in the same manner, with frightening consequences. While these concerns should be addressed, it should also be noted that the protesters had complaints about the unresponsiveness of the government to the Manipur situation, unemployment in the country, authoritarianism and denial of their constitutional rights. They chose the wrong way to highlight them, but these are concerns many others would share with them.</p>