Recently by a judgement of one of the bench of Armed Forces Tribunal a THREE STAR ranked officer was demoted to ONE STAR rank.

It would be pertinent to view this decision of AFT in the context that for promotion to the TWO/THREE STAR rank, the promotion board is normally headed by the respective Service Chief. Other members of the board are the GOC-in-Cs/FOC-in-Cs/AOC-in-Cs, PSOs at respective Service HQs and a specialist THREE STAR ranked officer. Composition of the promotion boards may vary only marginally in terms of members in each Service. Needless to emphasize that promotability of every TWO/THREE STAR ranked officer is APPROVED by the SENIOR MOST HIERARCHY of that particular Service. Therefore any reversal of decision taken by the promotion boards comprising of the entire hierarchy of each service by Armed Forces Tribunal effectively states that ALL MEMBERS INCLUDING SERVICE CHIEF of that particular Service were/are incompetent/dishonest/biased/lack integrity and many other negative personal  traits, both individually and collectively. It does not stop here. Promotion of TWO/THREE star officers is approved by Min of Defence ( Raksha Mantri and Defence Secretary are invariably in the loop in case of Three Star definitely).

Ironic it would appear that AFT benches comprising of retired Judge and a retired THREE STAR (normally)  (total 2 individuals) have been entrusted with demonical powers of  setting aside a considered opinion of nearly a dozen (may be more) senior most appointments of each service, thus  unequivocally calling the entire military hierarchy dishonest, lacking in integrity, incompetent and much more in the name of DISHING out justice.

Was the ARMED FORCES TRIBUNAL created for such incongruent conduct, behaviour and question the entire hierarchy of a particular Service by appearing to be SUPER JUDGES next only to the almighty GOD?

If the judgement of the AFT in above case is assumed to be rational, the entire promotion board ought to be dismissed from the Service for demonstrated professional profligacy, dishonesty and total lack of integrity.

Both decisions viz clearance for promotion by the two successive promotion boards       (Brigadier to Major General and Major General to Lt General) and reversal by the AFT can obviously not co-exist. Or can it? As is the case in this instance.

Even if we were to believe that the decision of AFT was the ‘RIGHT’ decision based on factual evidence, but the insanity of AFT’s decision stems from the fact that in reversing the decision the AFT members have deliberately and knowingly (not unwittingly) attempted to destroy the institution of military. No individual, irrespective of his/her status, can ever be bigger than the institution.

There cannot be better instance of ‘SELF-GOAL’ than the military leadership’s desire to establish the ARMED FORCES TRIBUNAL. Incidentally it was not forced on the military by a ‘BABU’ or a politician. We simply wanted to behave like a COPY-CAT by having AFT because ‘BABUS’ had the CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL(CAT). Incidentally CAT came into existence after a constitutional amendment vide article 323A.

Armed Forces Tribunal, which came into existence in 2007 has done nothing extra-ordinary to cover itself with glory in nearly a decade of its existence. Indeed it has provided an opening to the dozen odd THREE STAR ranked officers another five years of leisure at government expense.

There is absolutely nothing that could not be resolved within the laid down rules of each Service. Establishment of AFT has resulted in more indiscipline and false belief amongst service personnel that each and every decision of service HQs can be challenged. Is this state of affairs acceptable and more importantly does it augur well for the military in the long run?

Reversal of Service HQs decision on matters of promotion/postings etc by the AFT cannot, should not and must not be compared to reversal of lower court decision by higher court. In judicial hearing/decision making there is normally a single judge (except in case of benches at high/supreme court). In case of military the promotion board comprises of dozen odd senior most appointments of the military. To question their collective wisdom/decision by a single judge, who is largely unaware of matters military, is nothing short of judicial fratricide.

A word about members of AFT bench must be placed for an inquisitive reader and follower of the laws of the land/institutions. Each of the THIRTEEN AFT bench comprises of a retired Judge and a THREE STAR (normally) ranked officer as ‘nothing more’ than an Administrative Member.

The Judges of this great nation (from lower to supreme court) are protected by one of the most DRACONIAN ACT called Judicial Officers Protection Act (JOPA), which enables them to reverse the judgment (for reasons best known only to themselves) of a lower court/of a smaller bench without any accountability to anyone whatsoever, based on the same evidence, which had resulted in conviction/acquittal and vice-versa, notwithstanding ‘crocodile tears’ shed on account of non-appointment of judges to higher courts. Indian judiciary is one of the worst ‘self-serving’ organization of this country, which insists on selecting its ‘own people’. No other democracy in the world follows the collegium system as is in vogue in our great nation. The ‘self-righteous’ approach of Indian Judiciary is evident from their knee-jerk reaction towards establishing a National Judicial Commission.

Military opted to do a ‘self-goal’ by seeking and accepting appointment of a civil judge in Armed Forces Tribunal. No civilian judge, irrespective of his/her exposure/experience can comprehend military needs.

Perhaps it may not be too late to disband this monolith, which threatens to destroy and tear the  still largely unscathed disciplined fabric of Indian Military. In making this recommendation I am willing to take the wrath of the ‘dirty dozen’ THREE STARS, who will have no further employment after having retired at 60. Do not worry about the judges. They will find some opening, be it heading a consumer court or  become member/head of numerous judicial commissions forever alive in our great nation.

As I write this piece, let me assure the ‘nay-sayers’ and ‘silencers’ that this incident alone has not forced me to recommend dissolution of AFT. My interest in this domain is self-explanatory, since I wrote about MAT more than a decade back. I have closely monitored the AFT decisions (without claiming to be a ‘know-all). AFT was established to ensure that while individual grievances were redessed on priority but at the same time institutional standing was not compromised. In the instant case, irrespective of genuineness of the AFT decision, the institution of Military has been abused publicly. Perhaps saner action would have been to approach the current Army Chief, apprised him about the impending AFT decision and requested him to advise the officer (who was demoted) to put in for premature release. In this action a vacancy of Lt Gen would have been created and hopefully the ‘wronged’ officer promoted, if he was still in service. Most importantly ‘DIRTY-LINEN’ would not have been washed in public domain. Statistics, if viewed pragmatically, give clear evidence of efficacy or otherwise of the supposed more efficient mechanisms introduced for betterment of organisation as well as individuals. A mere look would indicate that after AFT came into being number of cases filed by military persons on absolutely frivolous issues may have risen considerably ( as told to me in off the record conversation by a three star, who held the post of AG at Army HQ that number of cases have trebled- authenticity not guaranteed). Thus it is evident that the moment a superior gives unfavourable decision, the individual runs to challenge the decision in AFT because it is more accessible than civil courts. Needless to add that constitution of AFT has actually caused to create more indiscipline in the rank and file of officers and men. It is for this reason it is recommended that AFT should be disbanded as soon as practicable because it has failed to meet organisational aspirations. Individual aspirations, always and everytime, are subservient to organisational needs.

Indeed the grievances of a military personnel must be addressed. In order to meet this very pressing need, I had recommended establishing a MILITARY ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL (MAT) in 2004. Article was sent to each Service Chief and Raksha Mantri. Only one Service HQ acknowledged receipt saying that MAT is not required on the lines proposed since AFT was already in pipeline. Entire text of my proposal for establishing MAT is attached below.

Gp Capt TP Srivastava

02 November, 2016

9818926254