A petition filed in the apex court pleads for re-investigating the mysterious death of a jawan following a sting expose by a website of the Sahayak system in the army. The authorities allege that the soldier took his own life
~By Naveen Nair in Thiruvananthapuram
It is a story that will shame many an army officer. The Sahayak or buddy system in which a jawan is deputed to perform minor (often menial) tasks for a superior officer is a relic from the days of the British Raj which continues to this day. Was it this pernicious practice and a sting operation by a media website exposing it that led to the suicide of Gunner Roy Mathew? His body was found on March 2, 2017 in a decomposed state in an abandoned barrack in the Deolali Camp in Nashik, Maharashtra, where he was serving.
Mathew had gone missing since February 25, a few days after he and other jawans were secretly videographed sharing their thoughts on how they were treated in the most inhuman way and had to even carry out domestic chores when deputed as Sahayaks.
The sting by journalist Poonam Agarwal of Quint.com created a storm and it is alleged by the Army that Mathew, fearing punishment at the hands of his superiors, had ended his life. It blames the journalist for having abetted his suicide. However, family members suspect foul play.
Mathew’s death remains shrouded in mystery and the Sahayak system that had upset him in the last days of his life has come in for much condemnation. That is perhaps why the Welfare Association of Ex-Army Aviation Technicians, an organisation formed by a section of the ex-servicemen based in Kerala, has filed a PIL in the Supreme Court with two pleas—one to do away with the Sahayak system in the Indian Army and to conduct a court-monitored investigation into what they call the “unnatural death” of Gunner Roy Mathew.
Admitting the PIL filed by S Chandrasekhara Pillai and PJ George, members of the ex-servicemen association, the apex court has issued notices to the Ministry of Defence, the office of the Chief of Army Staff and the Maharashtra government.
Mathew’s family completely endorses the PIL and maintains that their kin had not committed suicide.“There is no way he could have committed suicide. The room where the body was found was visited by us. It was bare at that time and with no support for him to have put a noose around his neck. It was only last year that he bought a piece of land to build a house. Suicide was the last thing he would have done,’’ Gracius, Mathew’s uncle told India Legal.
The Army maintains that Mathew’s suicide was abetted by Agarwal against whom charges have been framed under Sections 3 and 7 of the Official Secrets Act, for trespass, abetment to suicide and defamation. However, Mathew’s wife, Fini, mentions in the PIL that she was not aware of Mathew being under any stress from Agarwal. Nor had her husband mentioned the journalist’s name in the last phone conversation she had with him before he went missing.
The PIL notes that the abandoned barrack where Mathew’s body was discovered was hardly 50 metres away from the main barracks. It asks the crucial question as to how the dead body remained unnoticed for more than four days in a decomposed state.
One joins the armed forces to serve the motherland and not to do household chores…. It is so demeaning.
— Chandrasekhara Pillai, one of the petitioners
“The abandoned barrack was so near to the living barracks that a body could have never been lying there for more than four days; the smell, stench of decomposition would have attracted jawans living in the barracks hardly 50 metres away and animals like dogs certainly would have created an alarm long time back,’’ says the PIL.
More significantly, the PIL also notes that officers from the Deolali camp had put pressure on the family to sign a written statement naming Agarwal as the abettor of Mathew’s suicide. To quote the PIL: “The Officers deputed from Deolali camp where the body of Roy Mathew was found and others acting at their behest made repeated attempts to somehow by hook or crook through a combination of inducements, fear and coercion, obtain a statement from the vulnerable family of Roy Mathew to attribute suicide to the scribe who did the sting operation.”
The two petitioners make a fervent plea in the PIL to abolish the Sahayak system immediately. Requesting the court to intervene, they point out that it is a violation of the Article 21 of the Indian constitution which includes “the right to live with dignity”.
Citing their experience, they have pleaded before the Court that the system is nothing more than forcing jawans to do menial household tasks at the homes of senior officers.
“One joins the armed forces with a lot of respect and pride to serve the motherland and not to do household chores at a senior officer’s house. It is so demeaning. But jawans do it because their promotion and all other orders lie in the hands of these very officers. What option do they have? But this has to end,’’ Chandrasekhara Pillai, one of the petitioners told India Legal.
The PIL notes that officers from the Deolali camp pressurised the family to sign a written statement naming the journalist as the abettor of Roy Mathew’s suicide.
The ex-jawans have also asked why the Army is unable to abolish Sahayaks when the air force and the navy have already done so. In support of their affidavit, they have also submitted the copy of the recommendations of the 31st report of the Standing Committee on Defence of the 14th Lok Sabha, pertaining to “Stress Management in Armed Forces”, which has clearly called for an abolition of the Sahayak system in the Indian Army.
The report states that it is shameful that jawans who are recruited to serve the nation are forced to serve the family members of officers in household work which is demeaning and humiliating.
The Committee said that such a practice, which was followed during the time of the British, has no place in Independent India. It concludes by saying that “the ministry of Defence is expected to issue instructions to stop forthwith the practice which lowers the self-esteem of the jawan. Any officer found to be violating the instruction in this regard be dealt with severely”.
In January, following a sharp criticism of the Sahayak system by a serving jawan on social media, Army Headquarters had issued a notice to all units that Sahayaks cannot be used in such a way that it lowers their self-esteem.
Sensing that it was becoming a huge embarrassment, the army had sent out strict orders that all units needed to ensure that no “buddy” is found doing any household work.
The PIL will be taken up by the apex court after the summer recess and will be keenly watched. The Court’s ruling could have a bearing on the oldest and controversial practices followed by the Indian Army.