Logo

Logo

Game-changing order

The military “system” could well be turned on its head by a recent ruling of the Delhi High Court that…

Game-changing order

Representational image (Photo: Getty Images)

The military “system” could well be turned on its head by a recent ruling of the Delhi High Court that compensation of Rs.55 lakh be paid by the public-sector Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd and the Indian Air Force to a former pilot who had suffered severe, debilitating, injuries in an air crash. While the aircraft in question was the MiG-21 ~ once dubbed a flying coffin ~ the court’s observing that members of the armed forces cannot be put to “more risk than they had bargained for” could have huge implications for the work culture and ethos of the uninformed community. It is difficult to quantify a money value on the extent of risk for which a member of the forces had bargained, it could be an individual’s personal estimation, and now there could be no end to compensation claims being preferred in courts.

The number of accidents involving the over-flogged MiG-21 is itself astounding, there have also been accidents in which other planes were being flown, and not long ago the wives of helicopter pilots had approached the defence ministry protesting their husbands and kin (there are women flying “choppers” too) being asked to operate the vintage-design Chetak and Cheetah aircraft. Both the Navy and Army also use those “whirlybirds”. The court would appear to have been well-intentioned: pressing the manufacturers, and maintenance staff, to be more safety-conscious, yet it would require very careful scrutiny of the findings of the courts of inquiry into each mishap to establish design-defects, lax maintenance etc. It needs to be noted that top scientists, including the legendary Dr APJ Abdul Kalam and ace-pilot Denis La Fontaine, had headed committees that had probed air accidents but had come up with essentially procedural recommendations. True that personnel tasked with operating older-generation aircraft have their misgivings, but no firm conclusions can be drawn.

Unless the High Court order is given a fresh interpretation, there is a risk of an erosion of discipline and a breakdown of the chain of command and control that is critical to the efficient functioning of the military machine. It is accepted that the sun has long set on the days of “theirs’ not to reason why, theirs’ but to do and die”, yet no military or even paramilitary force can accept a situation in which “soldiers” pick and choose the orders they will follow depending on “the risk they had bargained for”. In fact, the very concept of what the court has mentioned runs counter to core military values.

Advertisement

When joining the forces personnel are aware that they may be required to “put their life on the line”, and though there is scope for debating compensation levels, seeking that those levels be judicially determined creates serious complications. A firm clarification is urgently required.

Advertisement