Current Affairs Topics Archive
International Relations Economics Polity & Governance Environment & Ecology Science & Technology Internal Security Geography Social Issues Art & Culture Modern History

‘Excessive secrecy’: Congress' Manickam Tagore calls for transparency in defence book guidelines

February 13, 2026 4 min read Polity & Governance Internal Security GS Paper 2 GS Paper 3
On This Page ▼

What Happened

  • A Member of Parliament criticised the government's proposed guidelines for serving and retired military personnel who intend to publish books, calling them "excessive secrecy" that stifles transparency and accountability.
  • The proposed guidelines are being framed by the Ministry of Defence in the wake of controversy over a former Army Chief's unpublished memoir, which reportedly contained sensitive observations about civil-military relations and operational decisions.
  • The MP argued that "truth should never need government clearance" and called for publication rules that balance national security with the public's right to information.
  • The Centre had already amended Civil Servants Pension Rules in 2021, barring retired intelligence and security officials from publishing material related to their departments without prior clearance from competent authorities.
  • Currently, India has no single consolidated law regulating book-writing by retired military officials -- a mix of the Official Secrets Act, service regulations, and pension rules applies.

Static Topic Bridges

Freedom of Speech (Article 19(1)(a)) and Reasonable Restrictions (Article 19(2))

Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution guarantees the fundamental right to freedom of speech and expression to all citizens, including retired government and military personnel. However, Article 19(2) permits the state to impose "reasonable restrictions" on this right in the interest of the sovereignty and integrity of India, the security of the state, friendly relations with foreign states, public order, decency or morality, contempt of court, defamation, or incitement to an offence. Any pre-publication clearance requirement must satisfy the test of reasonableness and proportionality.

  • Article 19(1)(a): Freedom of speech and expression -- fundamental right
  • Article 19(2): Reasonable restrictions in the interest of sovereignty, security of state, etc.
  • Supreme Court in Shreya Singhal v. Union of India (2015): Restrictions must not be vague or overbroad
  • Prior restraint on publication is generally disfavoured by Indian courts unless it relates to clearly defined security concerns
  • R. Rajagopal v. State of Tamil Nadu (1994): Right to publish one's life story is part of Article 19(1)(a)

Connection to this news: The proposed guidelines must navigate the constitutional balance between protecting classified military information (a legitimate Article 19(2) restriction) and preserving the right of retired military personnel to share their experiences and perspectives with the public.

Official Secrets Act, 1923

The Official Secrets Act (OSA), 1923, is the primary legislation governing the protection of classified information in India. Section 3 criminalises the communication of any information that could be "prejudicial to the safety or interests of the State," applying to both serving and retired officials. Section 5 makes it an offence to receive or share such information. The Act does not distinguish between intentional espionage and the publication of memoirs -- any disclosure of classified operational details by retired military personnel could theoretically attract prosecution under the OSA.

  • OSA, 1923: Colonial-era law, amended in 1967; still in force
  • Section 3: Spying and communication of information prejudicial to state safety (up to 14 years imprisonment)
  • Section 5: Wrongful communication and receipt of information (up to 3 years)
  • Applies to retired officials -- obligations survive retirement
  • No clear definition of what constitutes "classified" information -- classification system is administrative, not statutory
  • Law Commission (2nd ARC Report) has recommended modernising the OSA to align with democratic transparency norms

Connection to this news: The proposed defence publication guidelines are being framed partly because the OSA's broad and vague provisions create uncertainty for retired military personnel about what they can publish. Specific guidelines could provide clarity, but critics fear they could also be used as an additional layer of censorship beyond what the OSA already mandates.

Civil-Military Relations and Democratic Accountability

In a parliamentary democracy, civilian supremacy over the military is a foundational principle. The President of India is the Supreme Commander of the Armed Forces (Article 53), and defence policy is formulated by the elected government through the Cabinet Committee on Security. Military memoirs and books serve an important function in democratic accountability by providing informed perspectives on defence policy, operational decision-making, and civil-military dynamics. Countries like the United States and the United Kingdom have formal pre-publication review systems (such as the US Defence Office of Prepublication and Security Review) that balance security with transparency.

  • Article 53: Executive power vested in the President, exercised through the Council of Ministers
  • Cabinet Committee on Security (CCS): Apex body for defence and national security decisions
  • US model: Defence Office of Prepublication and Security Review (DOPSR) reviews manuscripts for classified information only
  • UK model: D-Notice system -- voluntary advisory notices to media and publishers
  • India's 2021 amendment to Pension Rules: Barred retired intelligence/security officials from publishing without clearance
  • No institutional mechanism in India for pre-publication review that is transparent and time-bound

Connection to this news: The debate highlights the absence of an institutional framework in India for pre-publication security review that is transparent, time-bound, and limited to genuine security concerns. Without such a framework, blanket guidelines risk being used to suppress inconvenient truths rather than protect legitimate secrets.

Key Facts & Data

  • Proposed guidelines: Ministry of Defence framing rules for serving and retired military personnel's publications
  • Trigger: Controversy over a former Army Chief's unpublished memoir
  • 2021 Pension Rules amendment: Barred retired intelligence/security officials from publishing without prior clearance
  • Official Secrets Act, 1923: Primary law governing classified information; applies post-retirement
  • Article 19(1)(a): Freedom of speech; Article 19(2): Reasonable restrictions for security of state
  • No consolidated law in India specifically governing military personnel's publications
  • US model (DOPSR): Institutional pre-publication review limited to classified content, with time-bound process