Lt Gen Rath Convicted of Corruption in Sukna Scam

Re: Lt Gen Rath Convicted of Corruption in Sukna Scam

Sir,

The question is NOT: How can the Military Secretary
 threaten or apply pressure on a Corps commander of equal rank.

So what, even if he can!

Even if he can, is it justified to come under pressure in carrying out my duties as a commissioned officer  commissioned specifically by the President of India to preserve, protect  and defend the Constitution of India and the territorial integrity of the nation (in contrast to the IAS officer who is appointed by the Ministry and does not get a Parchment personally signed in ink by the President and given under his seal of authority!)

___________________________________________________________________________
A commissioned officer is a military officer who holds a commission, a formal government document which vests power in the individual to whom it is issued. Typically, commissions are issued by the head of state; in the British Armed Forces, for example, the Queen or her agents give out commissions, while in the United States, the President hands out commissions, through the United States Congress.  In India , it is specifically signed by the President of India!
See the wording:

Elizabeth the Second, by the Grace of God of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, and of Her other Realms and Territories Queen, Head of the Commonwealth, Defender of the Faith, Lord High Admiral.
To our Trusty and Well Beloved ....... ....... Greeting:
We, reposing especial Trust and Confidence in your Loyalty, Courage, and good Conduct, do by these Presents Constitute and Appoint you to be an Officer in Our Royal Naval Reserve from the .... day of ........ ...... You are therefore carefully and diligently to discharge your Duty as such in the Rank of .............. or in such other Rank as We may from time to time hereafter be pleased to promote you to, of which a notification will be made in the London Gazette, and you are in such manner on such occasions as may be prescribed by Us to exercise and well discipline in their duties such officers, men and women as may be placed under your orders from time to time and use your best endeavours to keep them in good order and discipline.
And We do hereby Command them to Obey you as their superior Officer and you to observe and follow such Orders and Directions as from time to time you shall receive from Us, or any superior Officer, according to the Rules and Discipline of War, in pursuance of the Trust hereby reposed in you.
Given at Our Court, at Saint James's the .... day of ........ .... in the ..... Year of Our Reign
By Her Majesty's Command

____________________

The President of the United States of America
To all who shall see these presents, greeting:
Know Ye, that reposing special trust and confidence in the patriotism, valor, fidelity and abilities of .................., I do appoint ["him" or "her"] a ["Second Lieutenant" or "Ensign"] in the [name of service] to rank as such from the .... day of ........ ...... This Officer will therefore carefully and diligently discharge the duties of the office to which appointed by doing and performing all manner of things thereunto belonging.

And I do strictly charge and require those Officers and other personnel of lesser rank to render such obedience as is due an officer of this grade and position. And this Officer is to observe and follow such orders and directives, from time to time, as may be given by me, or the future President of the United States of America, or other Superior Officers acting in accordance with the laws of the United States of America.

This commission is to continue in force during the pleasure of the President of the United States of America for the time being, under the provisions of those Public Laws relating to Officers of the Armed Forces of the United States of America and the component thereof in which this appointment is made.
Done at the City of Washington, this .... day of ........ in the year of our Lord ................ and of the Independence of the United States of America the ..........
By the President:
_____________________
GO back and read your own Parchment! I don't have mine here.

______________________________________________________________________________________

It is a covenant trust placed on you and to fail that  trust for "coming under pressure threatening own career advancement or lure of future promotions" is  nothing short of squandering away a personal trust reposed on me personally by the President of the Nation.
Since the lives of men placed under me are dependent on my judgment & independent decisions I take using  my judgment as the sole guide, can I be influenced by coercions and inducements which some one else can put on me?Can I be coerced by my superior to violate my sacred duty in order to please his superior ?
This is where the honor of our profession comes, not in stupid OROP or is it  transgressed  when some one lower in seniority  than me  gets a higher pension!
Now you say: It is quite apparent that the trial itself is set up to please the present chief and Gen Rath is compounding his owes by taking this stupid line of defence.
If the organization is ready to punish a Lt Gen to please a General, isn't it tragic? 

Principles of justice are served when the punishment is for an offense and not when it is used to please a superior!
(or when it is used as an instrument of threat to others.)

Will the wheels of justice punish a "Commissioned officer" for using his judgment ?
That seems to be where the wheels of Justice of the organization has gone wrong.

Considering his defense being stupid and idiotic, he deserves to get the punishment awarded to him and perhaps more.

I repeat:
Lt Gen Rath ( and many others whose cases did not come to light and did not get indicted  for failure to discharge their duties with out  fear or favor !) failed that trust placed on him by the President personally  when he was commissioned with a formal parchment signed personally by the President   and he deserves to suffer the ignominy of the GCM and its punishment!
(and not for the indictments he is charged with and they are trivial!)
Again: There are ethical issues of the profession involved here. To have a vigilance department  with in Army is a very bad idea ( as bad as having SS in the German Army). Will having a Vigilence Department have helped uncover the transgression of  duty and ethical conduct in this particular case? Vigilence Department will be like a MP unit in the Fmn Hq.
What we need is Professional ethical education and ethical conduct in discharge of our duties. What we need is a "Bhagawat Geeta" of ethical conduct of the Profession sitting on our bed side table which every one can go to when dilemmas of ethical conduct troubles our mind. Such a thing would have helped to sort out the cobwebs in the mind of Gen Rath ( and many others!) when faced with situations like the one he faced with.

 And this is not unique. We face this every day in our conduct in our service. The transgression of the honor and the ethical conduct is visible  in every unethical move we make to advance our career or do favor to one who you like and punish one  who you do not like!
Nath


--- In indianexservicemen@yahoogroups.com, Achal Sridharan wrote:
>
> Colonel Nath has said it all. Thanks Nath Sir
>
> Sri
>
> On Sat, Jan 22, 2011 at 6:51 AM, jas.golden diaz.jas@... wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > I fully agree with CPC's comments. Firstly Gen Rath did not apply his mind
> > to the likely implications of his defence statement and I am surprised that
> > his counsel did not guide him properly. How can the Military Secretary
> > threaten or apply pressure on a Corps commander of equal rank. I am sure
> > corps commander's postings and promotions are NOT decided by MS at his whims
> > without involving the COAS and VCOAS.
> >
> > It is quite apparent that the trial itself is set up to please the present
> > chief and Gen Rath is compounding his owes by taking this stupid line of
> > defence.
> >
> > I wonder how these people who lack even basic common sense has reached such
> > high levels? Compare this with Subramanium Swamy who argues his own cases
> > even in front of SC winning hands down.
> >
> > jas