Why sting operations amount to taking law in your own hand

In Sweden, sting operations are a strict no-no. In the USA, on the other hand, sting operations are legit if done in league with, and approval of, authorities like the FBI. In the US, a distinction, admittedly involving a lot of hairsplitting, is drawn between laying a honey trap and entrapment, with the contention being while the former is a necessary adjunct to stinging a person, the latter amounts to egging him on to commit a crime which he had no intention of committing in the first place. Bangaru Laxman the then Vice-President of the BJP seems to have pleaded exactly that—he was entrapped—but he was nevertheless convicted of bribe taking when he was caught on spy camera accepting bribes for a fictitious transaction with two eager hands. Tarun Tejpal, wearing the halo of victimhood of the epical Vishwamitra, also seems to be suggesting that the BJP is now seeking to get its back on him for what he did to Bangaru Laxman and others by sending a Menaka to the wretched hotel lift in Goa of all the places. He is forgetting that while he used a spy cam to trap Bangaru, he himself stewed in his own juice—-not only by getting a bitter taste of his own medicine if his spin to the issue is taken seriously but also by being oblivious of the hawkish eye of the CCTV in the hotel lobby. Hubris seems to have done him in. Be that as it may.

There is no explicit law on the legality or otherwise of sting operations in India except that the Delhi High Court in Aniruddha Bahl v. State has upheld stinging on the ground that it is necessary to realize the ideals of freedom struggle, a cherished aspiration enshrined in article 51A(b) of the Indian Constitution. The High Court said right to sting, as it were, was an integral part of freedom of speech and expression especially in the context of striving towards a corruption free society. The much-awaited Press Council guidelines on sting operations are yet to see the light of the day. The Delhi High Court has filled the void by issuing its own limited guidelines directed at television channels on their right to telecast sting operations in public interest subject to approval by the government committee formed for this purpose. But all these are not enough when the need of the hour is a wholesome and comprehensive law dealing with the entire ramifications of the issue.

It is respectfully submitted that the Delhi High Court went overboard in elevating stinging to realizing the high ideals of freedom struggle because in this country, as indeed elsewhere, people including political parties are at daggers drawn at each other and out to settle scores through means fair or foul. In the event, the right to sting, as it were, has all the built-in disadvantages and sows the seeds of chaos as the second amendment in the US which confers right to gun on its citizens has done. Besides, as G. Pramod Kumar wrote in firstpost a few days ago, wanton entrapment with malicious intent albeit rationalized by the fig leaf of invocation of realization of freedom struggle spirit rhetoric is not an act of heroism but pusillanimity. It is curious that the mainstream political parties are maintaining a studied silence on the need for a comprehensive law in the dawning realization perhaps that stinging after all is a useful tool that could come handy one day and hence should not be foresworn even though it is admittedly a double-edged weapon that can recoil. But they should realize that left unchecked and unregulated it can destroy the society with people including political parties setting out to settle scores through spy cams in a spirit of vendetta. They may be fighting like Kilkenny cats—with both being vanquished and there being no victor at the end of the day. Stinging then could verily be the Frankenstein monster.

Let us by all means install CCTVs everywhere especially at public places, vulnerable to eve-teasing, robbery and terrorists attacks but eschew spy cams. CCTVs are not means of entrapment and score-settling which spy cams invariably tend to be. With due respects to the Delhi High Court far from being an instrument of realizing our freedom struggle ideals, stinging and its adjunct spy cams would only serve to vitiate the atmosphere in the country and unleash a never-ending vendetta.

The law that is being canvassed for in this article then should proscribe stinging except with the authorization of and in league with the specified governmental authorities perhaps using a private citizen in the know of things and complaining as a decoy. Like phone tapping it should be allowed to be done only for tightly and narrowly defined purposes, with ideally private citizens being kept away. It should strictly be a law-enforcing affair which can never be privatized. To be sure, stinging does not end up in mob or vigilante or private justice with the law enforcing agencies stepping in once people are caught with their pants down but nonetheless it has the potential of setting in motion the nightmarish prospect of reprisal and counter-reprisal despite the law of defamation.

The USA got it wrong with the gun law but has got it right insofar as sting operations are concerned. Let us emulate it insofar as the right to sting law is concerned. The refrain in this country is one should not take law in one’s own hands. Unauthorized stinging partially defies this admonition though admittedly the ultimate justice is rendered by courts.