Integrating National Security Framework (An interesting discussion by NISSMAT experts)

Good morning, good afternoon and good evening, ladies and gentlemen. As part of our NISSMAT series on the private security industry, we are doing the second recording, which deals with the subject of private security industry as a force multiplier for law enforcement agencies. Today we are assuming that the government of India has liked the idea that the security industry should help the law enforcement agencies. We are now looking at the fact of how information will be passed on from the people — from the guards on the streets or in various establishments or at the ports and airports — to a point where they can be collated, inference taken out, and passed on to the right people for taking an action. Correct.

So this is what we would like to discuss today. Today I'm again joined by president of NISSMAT Mr. Sepal Singh and director enterprise of NISSMAT Major General Deepak Maka. We will today discuss the mechanics of this integration. Specifically, we will dive into a PSI NAT grid type pipeline, a digital architecture designed to collapse decision cycles and transform every certified guard into a realtime sensor. If our first discussion was about the vigil, today it is about the wiring: how we link ground level chatter from our malls, ports, industrial hubs, streets directly into the heart of India's national security grid.

I start with a statement and I'm sure you'll all agree with it. Our law enforcement agencies have the authority but lack the density. The private security industry has the density, with over 9 million personnel on the ground in India, but lacks the formal channels to take any action. Today I would like to say that private security industry is not just protecting property anymore. They are sensors for national security. Chipal sir, may I have your comments on this?

You're absolutely right that the large force, millions of guards, are available in the country. They are just doing some duties which are more of a day-to-day work of guarding etc. Though the regulatory provisions were issued through PSARA, yet the government did not take any decision to involve the private security industry as such into any law enforcement manner or to help the law enforcement agency, as far as the help to the law enforcement agencies is concerned, as well as collection of intelligence. You said we are going to have a collection of information. I am of the firm view that it is up to the state governments who can declare legally to use private security agencies for collection of intelligence and information. This amendment, if it is done, then our private security force can be of great use and multiply the efforts which are presently available with the intelligence agencies of various — as you know, the intelligence agencies are not confined only to state intelligence; the intelligence is going to central intelligence agencies, like IB is there, like RAW is there, like NIA is.

So all these central agencies and the state agencies will take action on the information collected by the private security only if there are some legal powers or some orders are issued by the state governments that, all right, the private security industry is available in such and such manner, and we have to issue some SOPs whereby they can be given, not exactly the power, at least they can be asked that their coordination should be sought by the police agencies for such and such purposes. That's my point, that unless there's a clear enunciation of the policy, unless there are clear enunciation of some of the laws, some special laws can be enforced also, because the state government can enforce some special laws for law and order duty, as is in the police act itself. There is something like SPO; they can put a police act or they can add to the police act. Of course the act is a central act, but you can give some special orders in the state government so that the private security agencies as such are available, and to designate the use of private agencies for collection of intelligence, or, subsequent to that, as you said, for multiplying other duties which are being — there are not very necessary duties which are being performed at the moment by the police force, which is rather inadequate as far as the population of the country is concerned.

General Meta, may I have your opening remarks?

Yes. Actually, what Mr. Cal just mentioned: the population is increasing, the crime is also increasing, and there is a provision in the present day environment where each national, each person can approach the police to give the information, but not be passed. So the private security agencies have a very major role to play in terms of getting the intelligence and passing on to the law enforcement agency to act. Now to take an example, you just mentioned the areas like the railway station, the malls, the movie hall, the airports — the large number of people who are working there. They have supervisors. If they find something suspicious, they pass it on to the supervisor, and the supervisor, he passes on the information.

Now I'd like to sort of put another question here. What should be the structure for passing information? Okay. So let's concentrate on: there is information at the ground level. How does it get passed on? To whom does it get passed on? How does it get passed on? And how does, you know, ultimately action get taken?

Right. Like what Mr. Seal said, that once the state government accepts the fact that —

Let's assume that the government — I assume that the government of India has in policy decided that this is something that they would like to do. Now the question that we are wanting to discuss is: let us say that the policy exists, what should be the structure of the passage of information from the ground to up and up, and from the top for action to be taken?

Okay. Now in this case there has to be one point where the information should flow into. Now I was mentioning nationally or at the state level. Now it could be, as decided by the state government or the central government, it could be the police station, it could be the district headquarters of the police — which are the agencies to execute. Now once the private security agencies have been notified — all right, you are the ones who are going to be helping us — then they come on board with the law enforcement agencies. They may have to place a liaison officer with a law enforcement agency to whom the information is passed. Now, how the information is going to be passed: let's take for example an area which is industry based. Now a large number of security personnel are there. They have a supervisor. The supervisor now has to be in link with the liaison officer in the law enforcement agency. The person who finds suspicion, who finds something wrong going on, he passes on to a supervisor. Supervisor passes on to the law enforcement agency, the liaison officer who is sitting there.

So for the law enforcement agency to take action on that, if you have large numbers of people passing information to the district, to the central area where the action is to be taken, there will be utter confusion. There should be one man as liaison officer with the police headquarters or wherever, for the information to pass to him, and he needs to pass it on to the agency to take action. This is what I feel.

Sir, since you've been handling this subject, how does passage of information — and today it's the era of electronics also, where information can be passed on digitally, it can be passed on by word of mouth. Gone are the days where you went out to a person and spoke to that person. Today information must be passed in the shortest possible time. Sir, what is your opinion? How should it occur?

Before I go into details as to how, let me have one prefixation. You have said — I would like to have a little bit of clarification for the viewers. Policy decision by the central government is not the question. Enunciation of policy decision will not give the private security agencies the so-called even periphery powers to pass on or to assimilate or to disseminate the intelligence. This must be very clear, that the policy decision is not going to help. Policy decision is a policy decision. You see, there's a lot of difficulties in this. The article 21 of the constitution lays down that any sort of private person, if he is observed and his privacy is disturbed, he will be violating the privacy act of the article 21. The constitution provides privacy to the individual. You want to collect information, okay, collected information and you pass it on. First of all is that you are coming under the article 21 for collection of information, private information about an individual.

B, after this thing, I am supposing, as you said, all right, the policy enunciation has been done by the center, and after the state governments have issued certain orders to make the security agencies either auxiliary to the sovereign police force or an auxiliary sort of organization to pass on the information. This gives the cover to the security. Now the question is how the information is to be passed. Correct. Today the information or so-called intelligence is to be passed on not by word of mouth only. It can go, as you say, electronic is there; they can create a network whereby the dashboard is there, on which you pass on the information. The question is, once you pass on the information, then how this information is going to be further acted upon.

For example, when you are posted on a building, or let us say you are posted on access control, or let us say you are posted on some crowd control, the reports or the information which you see is required to be passed on can be only confined to some unusual activities — not the local information giving the private people or the private actions of the individuals. It is some unusual activity you note, not the regular flow of people going into access control. Then that observation is passed on to the dashboard or to the designated police officer, and that information basically is only a sort of information. It is not yet intelligence. Strictly retain the activities to your observation without involving your own analysis. Now the further analysis and assimilation and action etc. is left to the other agencies. You are only retaining your activities to your observation without involving your own analysis or judgment on that. Analysis is to be restricted, I again said, only to agencies like state intelligence units, RAW, IB, which are legal agencies for getting this intelligence.

So my submission is the only way for passing of the information is either through a network — there's a grid, there's a dashboard which they are having their own, they are passing on to each other, so the same dashboard can be made available; you can elaborate on that — and from that how it is passed on, the information to a designated police functionary in a police station, or in that particular crowd control if there is a sub inspector or something, how the information is passed on. Of course very useful information or observation can be given. My only premise is that this should be ensured not on the basis of policy decision by the states and the government, but by a legal cover to be provided either by the state law or by central laws. Thank you.

Deepak, if for example there was a platform to be made, an app to be made, where a person from his cell phone could pass on information to that particular app, the passage of information would become smaller. Also, I think we need to be able to define as to what is the quality and type of information that the person on the street should be looking for or should be trying to observe. Now, that would probably be something that we would cover later in the training aspect — as to what are the points that the person needs to be observant about. But I'm talking about the passage of information. Once a person sees something, he should have the electronic ability to pass on the information in the shortest possible time. Yes. Right. Number two, we should be able to use some kind of a blockchain technology where the information passed on cannot be tampered with, erased or changed. Yes.

So the structure where the information is going to reside has to be secure, and the persons who are managing it must be trained also to decipher the information that is coming on from now many more points than what it was coming from earlier.

That is exactly what I said. If everyone starts passing information, there'll be total chaos at the place where the information comes.

Let me just sort of say, let us say you can prune down. You have, let's say, 9 million observation points across the country. Yeah. Out of 9 million points, let us say that one tenth of it is the supervisory staff. Even if you divide it by 100, you're still creating a mammoth organization from where information is flowing in. Yes. So the ability to handle those many bits and pieces of information at whatever level we are doing it — so even if you're doing it at the state level or at the national level, I don't know what is the correct structure, but I'm asking you: what should the structure be?

The structure, as far as I visualize, is that whichever law enforcement agency is involved to cater for safety and security, firstly that has to be identified. Let's take for example the district headquarters of the police. That is one — that is the hub where they're going to take action based on the information which is coming. Now let's take an example. There's a private security company which is operating in a place and he finds that there is a likelihood of demonstration, likelihood of breaking of law by a certain amount of people. He should pass it on to the hub, which is the district headquarters, or wherever it may be, be it police station or so. The information should pass from the ground where they act to the place. But as far as the analysis is concerned, I go by what Mr. C is saying: the analysis factor — this chap on the roadside will not be able to do; he can only —

Yeah, he can say this is the point. Now this information passes and the law enforcement agencies say, all right, they start the patrolling cars and the people to curb that thing. You know, information should flow from the ground to the place where the action is to be taken.

So there's a lot of technology that has to be put in place for the information to be passed on and then analyzed and then given to the right people to take action. Yes. But as said, that information can be passed digitally, it can be passed on phone, it could be passed by email, whatever the case be.

I was discussing with a few friends of ours and one interesting point came up, especially on the cars that are stolen from our residences and so on so forth. They said that if a car is stolen and if the information can get passed on to the security guards on the ground that car number so and so has got stolen, the chances of its recovery are much greater — if the information can trickle down to the security guards. Yes. Cal, what do you feel about it?

You have told the reverse process. Yeah. Please, let me — you are going to the reverse process. If the information trickles down to the security guard, the chances are more. First of all is how the information goes up, then is it trickling down. Your first question was going up. The second question is it trickling down. The question of going up — the transaction or transition from the guard's observation or the security person's observation to actionable intelligence has many steps. Because you just have a guard's observation, or you have a security person's observation, or whatever is unusual they have observed, and that you are passing on on a grid or whatever way you want to use it, telephone etc.

Now the reporting, using mobile or interface, to log the observation, with the GPS etc., has a going up. Then it's validation, whether it is a valid observation or not. This is a question of, again, either you have an internal command structure in the security, where your PSA internal command center filters the observation given by a guard. For example, you say always something is going on and this chatter is going, which is received — I'll kill somebody, etc. — and he passes on this information. Now the validation of this information has to be done at the internal level. If private security is implied, then internal forces will do the validation, and the internal commandant of the security forces, after validating the information, will pass on to the national security dashboard or grid; he will pass on the information on a national security dashboard, a national security.

These are the ways. After that, cross reference — it again travels up, and then when it goes to the higher probability alert square — there is something, there's a higher probability this observation is correct — when it goes to higher probability level of alert, then the relevant intelligence agency will pass back the information to the district level, that is the SPs or whatever district level of their designation, or the specific individual, and after that the role of action will come. And then, as you say, in the case of the motor — this car etc. — it is a local intelligence; you pass a local intelligence to the police and police take action; it's a different thing. But it is a question of passing on the information upward or downward. So I have told you the upward process is like this. The downward process can be anyway, if you are passing information only to the level that will take action. If you are part of the information dashboard and it has gone up, then intelligence will take action. If, see, the bomb scare or the bomb loss there — then this entire thing, that there's some container having a bomb — then information will have to be washed or filtered at the various levels. Therefore the private security will have to appoint a liaison officer at the thana level probably, who should be acting as a sort of last mile for the observation made by the security agency, and this system is: received, alert, verified, and then it goes up and up. That is my submission.

Excellent, sir. So I have another question to ask. Now we have, let us say, many people spread out on the ground, and we have 9 million people in India who can be your eyes and ears. What is the type of information that you would like them to observe and pass?

Like I mentioned, if there's a likelihood of a demonstration which could lead to a law and order situation, that is one. You find some bad hats who are likely to be operating in that area, and the private security agency is aware of it — they can pass information: so and so, a group of two chaps has been seen in this area. It gives a caution to the law enforcement agencies. Like Mr. Seal has mentioned, if something suspicious comes in a container — a large number of suspicious things come in a container. Now each container depot has this security guard; if they find that it is an ongoing affair, they should inform that this nefarious activity is going on and there's something very suspicious. So these sorts of information, important information.

Now I further say, you find a person lying on the road — there's a provision by the nation that anyone can report to the police that an accident has taken place, but no one does it because they're scared that if they do it they'll be hauled up. For example, the other day at Dara, when this boy fell down with his motorbike in a ditch, the private security chap who was there, he was told — instead of telling the police or calling the ambulance, he spoke to his boss; by the time, the chap had died. So, you know, important information which is life-saving, which is saving the environment — those, I think, important things have to be passed.

Sep, what do you think about it? I am touching the same point, sir.

I have another question for you — what we should — you have asked me what type of observation should be passed on. This is your question. First, if you want me to clear, I'll clear that question. Awesome, okay.

You said — now you see, the information to be passed on can be in various categories. First is that you are going on a recce walk somewhere, or you're going on seeing some mall etc. If you find the normal pattern is not there, there are some unusual patterns, some unusual people are there — I'm only giving an instance — repeated sightings of the same type of people, and taking some photographs etc., or having different exit points etc., can be one observation by a security guard, which is really, as he sees it is there, this observation is to be passed on. This observation, I have told you, is passed on to the liaison officer etc., and further and further up. To which level is it to pass on: if it is only of the district level, district level; if it has to go higher, it will go to higher level. This is one.

Then there is logistic anomaly. Sometimes, you know, unsealed, as he mentioned, containers — these so-called host containers or something like that, they are there. Now there is logistic anomaly sometimes: the usual logistic is that the container will come in this form, but he finds that there's something in some such container which is not conforming to the normal standard and is being put into the cargo, or he finds that it is having some unauthorized symbols etc. He can pass on this observation, which can be molded further and passed on. Then there is the use of assets — suspicious inquiries are sometimes floated, about chemicals, about fertilizers, about electronics, about bank codes. All these dual sort of use of network or misuse of network, if again brought to the notice of a guard, and he passes on to the local thana, or through his own commander, PSI commander, to the thana — it is valuable information. The personal red flags: unusual behavior, changes in the pattern of the staff somewhere — he can pass on this. So your question is what type of observation should be passed on — only a few instances. So all these can be passed on by the security guard to the higher level, which is designated either the LO of the PSI or it goes to a thana level. That is my submission. Now ask your next question.

What about financial irregularities that any guard on the ground notices? How should he handle them?

I don't think a guard would have the capability to handle this. Yes.

No, I'll tell you. Suppose the industry and some equipment or some raw material is coming. He finds that the raw material has come and the voyage is there, but the raw material is not unloaded and goes out and is sold in the market. I've seen this happening. I've seen — now he has observed that the vehicle has come with the raw material, it is standing there for some time, all the paperwork is done, and the vehicle goes out the same way as it had come in. I've seen it myself happening with FO. So these are certain aspects which the security guard has to keep an eye on. As far as the financial aspects in terms of documentation, I don't think he has the capability for that.

Right. Seal sir. Yeah. For example, a guard notices a truck moving out from a factory without proper documentation. Should he report, or should his allegiance be to the factory owner?

No, this is only confined with the documents. If there is no suspicion, only documents are we seeing. If he doesn't suspect that this cargo or this particular truck has some unauthorized material going, or some unauthorized smuggling is being done etc., then it's different — if it is only a question of documents, he has to pass on the information to the next functionary in the proper, in their own organization, whosoever is there. But if we suspect that this cargo or this material which is carrying has got something different, then the level comes to different. Then in that case, at the state level there is something, national level agencies — this, as you call it, matches the pattern. Okay, all right, this truck is going and this is the form and this is suspicious — then the state level agency, that is a state level agency of a higher rank — the pattern of movement, the financing, from whom, who has financed, whether cross-border smuggling etc. — will be judged by that particular agency, and on the basis of the value of this observation, the further action will be taken either by the local police, or an alert is given to any multinational agency. There are, in addition to state level, there are multi-level central agencies, and they can pass on the information. I am only talking about one truck, with your question.

So okay, now, you know, we are talking about the positives that can be there. Now let us look at a negative part, where the persons who are supposed to pass on information become the very reason of doing something nefarious in that area, knowing fully well as to how the system functions.

How do we — you mean to say when the management themselves is involved in this?

No, I'm saying that the management we'll look at later. Let's take a security guard who's supposed to be observing and passing information. He becomes one of the persons who does something incorrect, knowing that nobody else is going to pass on information. So he feels more secure because he feels that he has the law enforcement with him. Sir, your comments?

I said the roles must remain segregated. You can't combine one role with the other. You have said in this case, for example, that he himself, that particular functionary himself, becomes a part of that smuggling effort — that's what we are trying to say — if any unethical actor, illegal actor — you are saying if that particular functionary himself becomes part of this. Now this is a different sense. I'll give you a very small example. There's a very big factory which is manufacturing Coca-Cola ahead of Noida, and it was manufacturing pure Coca-Cola, but somehow or other it was ascertained that no, duplicate Coca-Cola is being manufactured by them. Why? They say the bottles — only limited bottles are there; the bottles go inside, the bottles come inside, and the same bottles are filled, and those filled bottles outside are duplicate. So there is something wrong. Some agency was designated for that. I was asked to have a supervision over that and give the report to the concerned agency, the concerned manufacturer.

Lo and behold, what happened was that the guard was very useful and very positive — all the guards except a few, I'm going to get to that — and they were very positive. Whenever, how many Coca-Cola bottles there are, they'll count how many. All was very good. But when the used Coca-Cola bottles used to come back, they never counted whether the used bottles are 200 which has gone out, or is it 300 or 400. So what was happening is that particular guard was conniving; the used bottles were smuggled back, and that used matter was being used for production of spurious goods. So in this case, after the security people observed this sort of characteristics, they passed it on to the thana. The thana people then start investigation, and in the process of investigation it was found some drivers have connivance. They were taking the unloaded used bottles like anything inside, and nobody knew, and when they were coming out they were also filled with the Coca-Cola bottles. So the question is, the observation by the guard — an unethical guard or unethical person was conniving with that particular driver, two drivers. When they were given to the police station, after their action, whatever action the police take, you know that, and after that it's spelled out. So it's a question of how far you put that security guard or that functionary responsible for that. That is a question of investigation. That is not a question of information. After the information, if you have a doubt on the functionary, then pass it on to the state level; they'll get the functionary and they legally try to take action against him.

So as a corollary to what you just said, we recently had a case where security guards at a premises connived, actually, with people outside to steal air conditioners from a building that was already ready and had air conditioners and LCDs installed. So the guards connived with the on-site electricians and connived with the people at the kabari bazar to take these things out, sell them with the kabaris outside. Yes, you know that happened with the kabaris.

So this is a common practice that occurs. So — but that is not what we are — we are not considering intelligence collection. This is something, in fact, this is a question of investigation, a case. That is a different issue altogether. You can help in investigation — security people, private security guards, can help in that investigation, the officer — that is entirely different, not a question. Today's discussion is on information and intelligence collection. We got slightly sidetracked.

But now, you see, coming down to how do you develop raw information into intelligence. Now the first thing that I would like to suggest is that there has to be a mobile app interface to log an observation, and when you log an observation it should give the GPS and the time stamp of the person who's logging. So once the information reaches, then the process of validating, analyzing, disseminating probably will take place.

That is the most ideal situation. Can it happen? The most ideal situation, but, you know, we spoke about there has to be one liaison officer with the law enforcement agency. Does he have the capability? He says this information has come, there is going to be this problem likely to take place. Now the person who is to act, he has to analyze: is it worth it, not worth it, how injurious is it, and then act on it. So this private security agency — let's say the person as a liaison officer is an ex JCO — he doesn't have the capability for this. He is only passing the information what he has to the person concerned, so that they can analyze and take action, unless you have to place an officer to carry out the analysis and then pass the information.

Looking at analysis — we're just looking at how information gets passed on to a particular point where there is a set of people who are trained in the art of collecting information and analyzing it and passing it on to the right thing. So there's got to be a structure that would come up eventually, if a process like this is put in place, without a structure in place and a methodology to even safeguard the interest of the person who passed on information. Very important. This is very important. Right?

So unless these things are, you know — once we are discussing this — the passage of information also puts the person giving the information at risk. Yes. So now this is something that, you know, is a troublesome situation, and unless people's interests and lives are safeguarded, there can be a problem, or you may not have the information that the person already has. Sir, your comments on this.

My submission only is that till the security agencies have got some direct or indirect authority, the role absolutely should remain as an unseen role only, for a non-sovereign organization, by a security agency. When you come to the seen role — okay, we have done this thing, that thing — then it becomes difficult to divide as to what should we pass on, because there can be lots of ifs and buts in such agencies. You pass on some information which is not correct, you are yourself under law, under the bounds of law. Therefore, most of the time, as it stands today, the role should remain passive and legally compliant. The role of the private security agencies will remain, at this point of time, passive and only legally compliant. Yes, observation reports can be given for further verification. Yes, you can pass on some intelligence which you feel is intelligence — out of the way movement and all — to the collector, which will go from one board or other board. Or yes — no covert intelligence collection. No covert intelligence collection needs to be gathered by the PSI at this stage. That is a very difficult process. In a building or access control, he can confine himself to the reports of some unusual activities — not regular flow of information, not regular flow of passage or observation done on a day-to-day basis by the guard. Now strictly retain the activities to your observation without involving your own analysis or without getting into problems.

I'll tell you that as far as private security as a multiplier is concerned, certainly it can be used, but it needs to be — it is not very difficult. Don't talk in terms of policy decision. Don't talk in terms of even legal amendment. It is a simple role which can be given to them; proper coordination should be there, and orders, SPOs, special orders can be passed by the state authorities. Proper coordination should be there at this stage, and at this level the information passed on by the security agency should be validated by the police forces or concerned agencies. Correct. That's enough at initial stages, so that we are able to start at a point where we say, all right, there is some — not exactly thirty — some reliability is placed on that, as well as PS becoming a part of the digital net. I am of the view it is definitely a very good — today is a digital day, and today is the time of digital and AI, artificial intelligence. Certainly, with the passage of time, it should be done. But I feel that private security agencies as a multiplier can be even now used, by a little change, by the state authorities giving certain orders of proper coordination and getting reports from them and relying on the private security agencies' reports.

Sir, I have one clarification. You have a lot of experience on this. So at, let's say, a police station or the district headquarters, is there any person sitting on the board who is taking the calls and taking the information from people concerned, sir?

Sir, you know, my query is: at any law enforcement hub, be it the police station, be it the district headquarters, is there someone manning the board 24 hours to get any input which comes to him?

You see, that will be clarified by the moderator himself. We know that, as far as the security agencies are concerned, they themselves should have their own control room. They have got their own control room; in the initial stages, either at the gate or somewhere, they have got all the information which is coming. It is monitored — should be monitored. It is the security forces, the private security itself, that has to guard that particular place, or to be where they are. So it's not a question of intelligence itself; as a matter of ethics, we are posted — security forces are posted, private security is posted — to safeguard them.

But if they do not — if it's not done, proper checking at the gate or various places — for example, at one place there were security guards all over; there was sort of — some people were misusing and throwing off the material, raw material, outside. How can they throw out, there being a huge big perimeter wall? So it was observed that what was happening was that there were no perimeter walls there. There were high-rise morchas on the perimeter, near the perimeter, inside, but the security guards were not being posted there. So what was happening is that in between, certain perimeter walls or places were low, and the material from inside was being thrown outside without being observed. So my point is, that sort of thing is up to the proper security agency which is posted there, because they are to guard against any unethical activity. It is very very easy to say, but I can manage to discuss some case studies; I'll tell you how it has been proved. Many a time such things happen because you get in the routine. So therefore, as you rightly said, there should be one proper place where information should be coordinated and gone into and should be taken. Yes, that is done by the security forces; they have got their own. If it is a number one section only, that's a different thing; if there are two sections or three sections posted, then they normally post a PSI inspector etc., or some other officer, who sits in that particular room and monitors the information given by various guards.

Gentlemen, so what you're implying is that — what I can understand — the security agency which has been earmarked to assist the law enforcement agency — this PSI may be involved in 15 different areas. So what I can understand by what you're saying is that the company which is providing the private security should have a control room where all the information flows, and from there the information flows to the law enforcement agency.

You see, the information is solicited — no. There is one question, to solicit the information; the other is to pass on the information. You are not soliciting any information, but information is coming to you as a sort of — you know, the reporting tool is there, the tier is there — that is the tier category of observation. That is: what type of observation should there be, what should be the recce pattern around the particular house, what should be the repeated sightings of the vehicle going from inside, what should be repeated persons photographing, if required, what are the logistics anomalies if they're existing anywhere inside, what are the other assets being taken out. It happened at one place: the entire mold, which was molding some soaps — the entire mold, the huge big thing, the mold, not that one, about tons of weight — the entire mold was taken out of the way; the duplication was being done, which means the checking etc. was not there. So this is all there, but the personal role to be played by the private security agencies, and the trained and professional security agency, is different. It is not to do with collection of intelligence; it is a question of guarding that particular place or safeguarding the assets of that place. So what we are talking today is about the intelligence, or so-called observation, on a different level, which the chairman is trying to point out.

Sir, we've run out of time and I want to thank both of you for helping us bridge the gap between vision and execution. Today we have discussed and proven to ourselves that private security agencies can be a force multiplier, not just in concepts but in reality. If this thing is put into place, we are waiting to unleash information that the country has never seen before.

And to our audience, if you believe in a safer India, share this conversation and join the dialogue for all future discussions on this subject. I'm Pawjit Aluya and I'll see you in the next recording. Good day.