National Counter-terrorism Centre in India: Organisational Debacles Involved

It has been confirmed by top intelligence sources that the US Defence Secretary Robert Gates during his visit in January 2010 had warned India of an imminent terror attack in Mumbai and Pune. The fact that the attack took place despite prior information reveals that India lacks the mechanism required for assessment of terrorist threats. There are various agencies which are engaged in intelligence gathering. All the information emanating from these agencies need to be collected and analysed under a single agency which would lead one to predict with some certainty the threats emanating from terrorists. This however is not happening due to lack of inter-agency cooperation and dissemination of information related to terrorist threats. Under the circumstances the role of National Counter Terrorism Centre (NCTC) proposed by the Home Ministry becomes significant.

NCTC is supposed to take over the counter-terrorism responsibilities which has till now been vested with the nine intelligence agencies. Under the proposal agencies like National Investigation Agency, the National Technical Research Organisation, the Joint Intelligence Committee, National Crime Record Bureau and National Security Guard would be brought under NCTC. However the relation of NCTC with agencies like Research and Analysis Wing (RAW), Aviation Research Centre (ARC) and National Technical Research Organisation (NTRO) has not been specified. NTRO at present is the super-feeder agency which provides technical intelligence (top signals intelligence agency set after the Kargil war of 1999) to other agencies on internal and external threats. Although NTRO maintains a degree of autonomy, it is under the control of RAW, a wing of the Cabinet Secretariat.

In the United States, the national counter-terrorism centre is part of the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI). The director of the ODNI reports to the President of United States. Below the ODNI is the United States Intelligence Community (IC) which is a federation of 16 agencies, called ‘elements’. Out of these 16 elements, the CIA is an independent agency while the rest of the 15 elements are under the direction and control of their respective department heads, all cabinet level officials reporting to the President. The director of CIA reports to ODNI. ODNI has no authority to direct and control any element of the IC except its own staff.

India can adopt a somewhat similar organisational pattern for the NCTC under which it would act as government’s knowledge bank on international terrorism drawing experts from different agencies engaged in intelligence gathering on deputation basis. The Director of the NCTC should be selected through consensus between the Centre and the states (in the United States the appointment of Director has to be approved by the Senate) keeping in view the federal structure of the Union of India and should be under the direction and control of the Prime Minister. Further, the NCTC should act like an organ of NTRO whose Director should report to NCTC. NTRO should collaborate with other intelligence agencies but should have no power of control and direction over their staff. Other intelligence agencies like RAW and ARC should be governed by the rules and regulations of their respective departments and ministries, its Secretary reporting to the Prime Minister through the Cabinet Secretary. Such a mechanism would result in better inter-agency coordination while simultaneously preserving the independence and autonomy of agencies like RAW and ARC. At present the Secretary (Research) of RAW is under direct command of Prime Minister with Joint Intelligence Committee (JIC) coordinating the information relating to intelligence within RAW and ARC.

There is a lesson to be learnt from what happened to NTRO when it was established in 1999. It was not able to function properly due to its tussle with RAW and ARC. Going by the experience of NTRO such conflicts can’t be ruled out between NCTC and the nine agencies which it is expected to preside over if clear delimitation of the powers, functions and responsibilities of each wing and its relation with NCTC is not spelt out. As of today the Home Ministry has not spelt out the organisational structure of NCTC vis-à-vis RAW, ARC and NTRO amply clear from the statement issued by Mr P Chidamabram, Union Minister of Home Affairs wherein he has reiterated that “The positioning of the Research and Analysis Wing, Aviation Research Centre and the Central Bureau of Investigation would have to be re-examined and a way would have to be found to place them under the oversight of NCTC to the extent they deal with terrorism.”

Further the central issue of ‘who will run the NCTC’ has not been answered by Mr Chidambaram. According to his plan, intelligence agencies under the ministries of defense and finance would continue to remain with their respective ministries but their representatives would have to be deputed mandatorily to NCTC. But this doesn’t specify as to whom the NCTC will report to. India has the option of taking lessons from the United States which has similar counter-terrorism organisations with some improvisation keeping in mind the fact that the two have different political set ups.

Whatever organisational set up is adopted for the constitution of NCTC, the point which needs to be kept in mind is that the functions of each wing of intelligence should be demarcated with command and control structure clearly specified. It is not the dearth of information which is the cause of concern in counter-terrorism. It is the sharing and coordination of information between different agencies engaged in intelligence gathering which is the cause of concern and NCTC needs to be free from this debacle.

(Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not represent the views either of the Editorial Committee or the Centre for Land Warfare Studies).