All posts by admin
Posted on 11 February, 2014, No Comments Comments admin
In the last decade the UPA government has flip-flopped on Telangana. Since 2004, it promised the creation of Telangana. The country had to wait till December, 2009 when Mr. P. Chidambaram made an announcement that the government had, in principle, decided to create the state of Telangana. The government then backtracked and instead appointed the Justice Sri Krishna Committee to examine the entire issue. The Committee led us nowhere.
The UPA in 2013 again took a decision, in principle, to create the state of Telangana. The cabinet belatedly endorsed it. The present session of Parliament is unable to proceed effectively on account of the favourable and the negative reactions which have been created by the Government’s decision. The BJP has categorically stated that it is in favour of creation of a separate state of Telangana. We have, additionally, requested that the legitimate concerns of the people of Seemandhra should be addressed. Reconciliation of both these efforts is neither difficult nor impossible. Regrettably the UPA has not taken effective steps in this direction.
I have earlier commented on the manner in which the UPA has stalemated the creation of Telangana as contradistinct from the manner in which the NDA created the three states of Jharkhand, Chhattisgarh and Uttarakhand in a conciliatory and smooth manner. Today, only eight working days of the current Parliamentary session are left. Two of these eight days are Fridays which are reserved for private members’ business. Effectively only six days in which legislative business are possible, remain in the current session. The Andhra Pradesh (Reorganization) Bill has not even been introduced in Parliament. Till the last minute, there is no clarity as to which of the two Houses will the Bill be introduced in. There are also lingering doubts about whether the UPA is following, legally and constitutionally, the correct course in an effort to create the state of Telangana. I have a lurking suspicion that the UPA is prolonging the issue. Is the eventual intent of the UPA to make the issue of creation of Telangana infructuous in the present session and consequently in the UPA rule?
Issues such as formation of states create a strong underlying sentiment. It is unfair for political parties to create an aspiration and not fulfill it. The UPA should immediately introduce the Andhra Pradesh (Reorganization) Bill for ratification of the both Houses of Parliament. It must ensure that to the extent possible, it balances the interests of both the regions and that the Bill is constitutionally compliant. I am looking forward to support the Bill.
Posted on 10 February, 2014, No Comments Comments admin
The last weekend was an extremely busy one for Narendra Modi and the BJP. On Saturday, he was in Imphal, Gauhati and finally in Chennai addressing rallies. On Sunday, after an initial programme of an educational institution in Chennai, he was addressing different functions at Kochi and Thiruvananthapuram.
The defining moment of public functions was the unprecedented audience response to Narendra Modi. The Imphal rally is perceived to be the largest political rally in Manipur. The BJP does not have a very strong organization in Manipur. Despite that, for Modi to draw an unprecedented crowd itself is an indicator of the current mood. He attracted massive crowds at the party rallies at Gauhati and Chennai and finally in Kerala. His other functions defied religious and the caste divide. The communities, where there had been lesser support for the BJP in the past, enthusiastically invited him to their functions. Their response was overwhelming.
There is currently a mood of disillusionment with Congress. People are looking for a hope. Does Modi symbolize all that an exasperated population is looking for? People want a tall, inspirational and decisive leader. They want to redefine standards of probity? Price rise, unemployment and stagnation of economy are disturbing them. It is, therefore, understandable that in traditional BJP strongholds in north, central and western parts of the country Modi should draw an unprecedented response. What does this unprecedented support mean in areas where the BJP traditionally has not been very strong? How is it that in states of the north-east, West Bengal, Andhra Pradesh, Tamil Nadu and Kerala the attendance at Modi rallies is unprecedented and the crowd response is electrifying? Does this trend signify something more?
Obviously such mammoth crowds do not appear out of thin air? They indicate a strong undercurrent. It is an undercurrent, which is motivated both by anger and also with hope. The people are angry with the status quo. They want a change. Modi signifies that change and the hope that the change will be for the better. The political support behind Modi now needs to convert this election into a referendum on Modi. If he manages to do so, this undercurrent will translate into seats. The support of the various sections of the society is much larger than the strength of the BJP in those states. Are we in for a pleasant surprise in these regions?
Posted on 09 February, 2014, No Comments Comments admin
Yesterday, a statement of the CBI Director, Shri Ranjit Sinha was published in the Economic Times . The truth had slipped out. He said that the UPA would have been happier if Amit Shah had been charge-sheeted in the Ishrat Jehan case. He further went on to add that the CBI found no evidence against Amit Shah. Since the statement was expected to attract a lot of adverse comments against the Government, the CBI Director issued an unconvincing clarification the he had been misquoted. Independent of the CBI Director’s statement and the clarification, as the tenure of the UPA draws to a close, it may be helpful if the process of manipulation of the CBI is seriously examined.
Using Police and investigating agencies to fabricate cases is nothing unusual. During the Emergency almost two lakh FIRs were concocted against political activists. Those in preventive detention were detained under the Maintenance of Internal Security Act (MISA) and the others under the Defence of India Rules which were applicable during the proclamation of Emergency. Most FIRs registered by the Police were somewhat similar. The opposition political workers were accused of delivering a speech at the Milk booths or a Bus stop in the early hours of morning as to how the Congress Government should be overthrown. These were no grounds of detention. Regrettably not a single police officer stood up and revolted by asserting that he would not lodge a false FIR or implicate an innocent man in it. They all colluded in contributing to the tyranny of the Emergency.
The UPA during the period 2004-2014 mastered the art of manipulating the CBI. The CBI during this period was not controlled by the Government. Worse still, it was controlled by the ruling party. A pliable person was selected to become Director of the CBI. The CBI as an organization is driven by the Director. He has the last word. Investigating officers prepared the investigation file with the idea of inculpating or exculpating a particular person. The internal checks and balances had completely collapsed. The Directors were offered fresh jobs on the eve of retirement. A post-retirement job would be suggested to them. This would contribute to their pliability. Factually, the Directors were offered post-retirement jobs ranging from Governorship to the membership of the UPSC. A Special Director who retired recently and took a special interest in wanting to implicate Amit Shah in the Ishrat Jehan case was appointed the Vice Chancellor of the Jamia Millia Islamia even prior to his retirement. Newspaper reports have indicated that he has also been short-listed for the appointment of a Vigilance Commissioner in the CVC.
In a detailed letter that I had written to the Prime Minister recently I had mentioned exhaustive reasons of how senior BJP leaders like Amit Shah, Gulab Chand Kataria and Rajender Rathore were falsely implicated by the CBI. In Amit Shah’s case the High Court while granting him bail observed that there was no prima facie case against him. The case against Gulab Chand Kataria was so palpably fake that the Special Judge granted him anticipatory bail. In Rajender Rathore’s case the Special Judge discharged him at the stage of framing of the charge itself. Conversely, the UPA was kept in power as a minority government with the outside support of the Samajwadi Party and the BSP. In both cases it was the cooperation of the CBI that was instrumental in manipulating the support of these two parties. Their top leaders were charged for possession of disproportionate assets.
The denial of the CBI Director that he made the statement which the Economic Times published is immaterial. There is voluminous evidence available with regard to the pliability of the CBI even independent of his retracted statement.
Posted on 08 February, 2014, No Comments Comments admin
On February 5, 2014, the Raksha Mantri Shri A.K. Antony made a suo moto statement in the Rajya Sabha. His statement is in relation to the disclosures in the media, which are based on documents supplied by the prosecutors in the competent Italian courts. The Raksha Mantri said that a crucial document seized from Mr. Guido Haschke contains two important statements. The word “FAM” refers to the ‘Family’, which he believes, is the Tyagi family. He cannot make out who the words “AP” refers to. He further states that there is another document by Mr. Christian Michel which targets certain Indian leaders.
The document dated March 15, 2008 recovered from the Italian middleman gives the understanding of the Italian middleman about India. It mentions “as Mrs. Gandhi is the driving force behind the VIP, she will not fly any more in MI-8”. This document gives a list of persons including various Ministers and party functionaries who are close to Mrs. Gandhi.The account sheet separately seized, uses under the title ‘Political’ which refers to “AP”. The next entry is “FAM”, which now is admitted to mean Family.
Admittedly, in the deal kickbacks have been paid and the Indian system has been subverted. The contract has, therefore, been cancelled. I have already said that these note sheets remind us of the 1987 seizures in Sweden where the entry in Martin Ardbo’s diary referred to the Word ‘Q’. It eventually became clear as to who ‘Q’ was. Is it rocket science, in the political arena, to decipher the abbreviation mentioned in the note sheet? Is it not unusual for middleman to be referred to as ‘Family’?
When words in their natural course are understood to have a particular meaning, why should the word ‘Family’ be given a meaning other than how it is understood in India?
Posted on 07 February, 2014, No Comments Comments admin
I had, on June 4 2013, made a detailed comment inviting attention ‘Should CBI uncover the IB’. India’s internal security is challenged by several cross-border and local modules. From Jihadi terror to Maoist insurgency we find a continuous challenge being faced by the Indian State. Intelligence and counter-insurgency are one of the most effective responses to deal with this challenge. These operations include the collection and dissemination of information, intercepts, intrusion into insurgency modules, financial temptations given to informers and busting of such modules. Our intelligence agencies have to carry out these operations in utmost secrecy. Covert operations are undertaken but never admitted. A large number of these operations are without the backing of statutory law, since intelligence agencies in India function only on the basis of internal procedures of the government. This is on account of larger public and national interest. Hopefully, as we mature as a democracy, these operations could be brought under the framework of law and then subjected to an element of limited Parliamentary scrutiny.
The intelligence agencies get information with regard to the proposed activity of terrorist module of which Ishrat Jehan was a part. This information is processed and disseminated. The module is busted and its operations are foiled. The fact that Ishrat was a part of Lashkar-e-Taiyyaba (LET) is evidenced by Jamaat-ud-Dawa (JUD) claiming through its Lahore based Ghazwa Times that its activist has been killed. Subsequently, David Headley in his interrogation by both the FBI and NIA admits to this operation. The Legal Attaché of the US Embassy in India has issued a document to the Intelligence Bureau in response to its queries further evidencing this fact.
When the alleged encounter of Ishrat Jehan and her associates took place, the UPA-I was already in power. In a public interest litigation filed in the Gujarat High Court by her parents, the Union government took a categorical stand that Ishrat was a LeT operative and the alleged encounter of June 15, 2004 was genuine. This was when Shri Shivraj Patil was the Home Minister. The change in the Home Ministry led a change in Government’s stand. Under Shri P. Chidambaram as the new Home Minister, the Home Ministry in its affidavit decides to wash its hands off from the encounter. It now starts cooperating with the petitioner for probing the entire operation. The political establishment had hoped that its other attempts having failed, probing this could be a case for implication of the political leaders of the Gujarat government.
After being investigated by an SIT set up by the Court the case is referred to the CBI for investigation. Among the officers associating with the investigation was a person who was selected by Ishrat’s parents who were petitioners. The SIT comprised of three persons, one of whom was the petitioner’s Nominee. A large number of policemen, named in the FIR, belonging to the Gujarat Police are arrested. Negotiations are held with them and a political bargain is struck. Chargesheet is not filed against them within 90 days; and they are given a benefit of default bail. Those who decided to turn witnesses are promised that they would be left out of the chargesheet even though some of them are present when the actual killing took place. Their own statements implicate them and yet they are neither accused nor approvers, they are mere witnesses. Their names were excluded from the first and second chargesheets as accused. This is a procedure unknown to law. Statements given by these persons are recorded under section 164 CrPC not in Ahmedabad but in a court in Mumbai. An accused cannot be a witness against a co-accused. He can only be an approver. Those present in the actual shootout are excluded from the list of the accused so that they can implicate others who were not even present in the shootout.
A feeble attempt is made to implicate the political leaders of Gujarat. A theory of white beard and black beard is concocted. But that is not evidence enough. The ire now turns towards the IB. Those who were responsible for evidence collection, busting the module, interrogation of the accused are all sought to be implicated. The terrorist credentials of the victims are sought to be retrospectively wiped out. Two charge sheets have now been presented to the court.
The alleged encounter took place when UPA-I was in power. Admittedly there is no evidence against the political leaders of Gujarat. The covert operations of the central Intelligence Bureau have been made the subject matter of a criminal law investigation. The source of information of the IB, the veracity of that information, the dissemination of that information, the manner of busting the module, the interrogation of the victims, the organization of logistical support in busting the module will all be a subject matter of criminal law trial. The ultimate wise man who was the Home Minister in 2009 undertook the operation with the idea of implicating Narendra Modi and Amit Shah. He has ended up implicating the IB, an agency of the UPA Government which during the tenure of the UPA is being accused of having engineered the fake encounter. The nature of the encounter would be adjudicated by the competent court. However, the damage done to India’s intelligence agencies and its ability to undertake covert operations is irreparable. In my Article of 4th June, 2013 I had written “Only Pakistan and LeT would have the last laugh. The myopic political regime in Delhi has not realized the significance of destroying the institutions. Harass the Gujarat Government even if it means destroying India’s security apparatus -The objective of the Congress Party is clear.”
Posted on 06 February, 2014, No Comments Comments admin
Political discourse, in the run up to a general election in particular, is best anchored in decency and decorum. Equally, the tendency to underestimate the knowledge of economics of one’s opponent and overestimate one’s own is best avoided.
Finance Minister P. Chidambaram’s assertion, in an interview to the BBC, that the knowledge of economics of Narendra Modi, the prime ministerial candidate of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), can be written on the reverse of a postage stamp, even if offered in a lighter vein, smacks of arrogance.
His subsequent question enquiring why Modi has not spoken about the fiscal deficit, the current account deficit or monetary policy is even more intriguing. Is an attempt being made to define the qualifications and terms of reference of a prime ministerial candidate or the finance minister’s own successor? Additionally, does the ability to govern rest on academic degrees and theoretical knowledge?
A look at the present Congress party-led United Progressive Alliance (UPA) cabinet and the qualifications of its 31 cabinet ministers is instructive. Apart from the good doctor himself, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, who has a Ph.D from Oxford, not one of his senior ministers has a formal degree in economics.
Many of them are students of literature (External Affairs Minister Salman Khurshid) and history (Communications and IT Minister Kapil Sibal) who then went on to become lawyers. The closest that any of them come to the study of economics are the luminaries who either studied commerce (Parliamentary Affairs Minister Kamal Nath), management (Chidambaram) and engineering (Rural Development Minister Jairam Ramesh).
Surely, it could not be this lack of formal training in the dismal science which explains the state of the economy today. Apart from earlier stints during the I.K. Gujral government, the present incumbent has been finance minister for six years.
During UPA-I and II, the overall growth rate has declined from a high of 9.6 percent to an estimated 4.5 percent for 2012-13.
Let us look at the individual sectors.
The prime minister, modest by nature, in his farewell press conference Jan 3, said: “I am concerned that we have not been as successful as we need to be in generating employment in the manufacturing sector.”
According to a joint study by Boston Consulting Group and the Confederation of Indian Industry (CII) in November 2013, the share of manufacturing in India’s gross domestic product (GDP) declined to 15.1 percent in 2013, the lowest in the decade.
Even if this figure is tentative, the fact that the share of manufacturing in the GDP is declining strongly is not in any doubt. The new land acquisition law effective from Jan 1 makes land acquisition, essential for this sector – and something that can take 3-6 years from start to finish – cost two-four times higher.
Not only will the manufacturing sector not produce the hundreds of millions of jobs hoped for by 2025, but the Congress-led UPA government has succeeded in complicating the task for its successor. Course correction will require huge amounts of capital to be invested and policy induced encouragement to the sector, conspicuously lacking in the last decade.
The situation relating to agriculture is worse. More than 60 percent of India lives in rural areas and relies largely on this sector for survival. The contribution of agriculture to the GDP has been steadily declined from 19 percent in 2004-05 to 13.94 percent in 2012-13.
Pointing fingers at one’s opponents and hurling incentives is unlikely to alter the ground reality. The farmer is losing his land through manipulated processes of urbanization. The compensation that the farmer receives is way short of what the land mafia gets.
To try to explain food price inflation, from which the country as a whole is reeling in terms of more money in the hands of the producer, is strange. If this is so, how does one explain suicides by farmers. In Karnataka alone, where the latest invective was hurled, a total of 1,003 deaths were reported between 2005 and 2009. The number of deaths in 2012-13 were over 100.
And now inflation.
The figure was 3.8 percent in 2004 which increased to 12 percent in 2010 and is still around 11 percent. This level of inflation has the effect of nullifying almost all the other gains, especially since growth is around five percent.
The overall job creation in 2004-05 was 460 million. In 10 years, the number has only increased to 470 million. This also speaks for itself. A statistic on which the government has been conspicuously silent relates to Gini coefficient, which measures inequality. A Gini coefficient of zero expresses perfect equality and a coefficient of one expresses maximal inequality.
Those responsible for economic policy decisions would be well advised to look at the growing disparities. An increase in the Gini coefficient from 0.325 in 2004-05 to 0.39 in 2012-13 is alarming.
Given the overall fall of GDP growth from 9.4 percent to 4.5 percent, a decline in the share of manufacturing and agriculture in GDP and jobless growth from foreign investment in the services sector, which accounts for nearly 60 percent of the GDP today, should set the alarm bells ringing.
Along with rampant corruption and scams, this makes a toxic and highly combustible cocktail. What is required is urgent course correction and not vitriolic polemic.
Nothing is more galling than the use of government money to project half truths. Expensive half-page advertisements costing a fortune maintain that our exports increased from Rs.2.93 lakh crore (Rs.2.93 trillion/$47 billion) to Rs.16.34 lakh crore (Rs.16.34 trillion) in the last nine years. Not mentioned is that imports have gone up even faster, leaving us with a trade deficit of nearly $200 billion.
In 2004, our exports were $74 billion and imports $57.24 billion – a trade deficit of only $17 billion. In 2012-13, our exports were $306.6 billion and our imports $502.2 billion – a trade deficit of US$ 195.6 billion! The rupee meanwhile has gone from 44 to the dollar in 2004 and is inching up towards 63.
Senior economic managers of the UPA need to indulge in some introspection. Display of humility and less of hubris may actually go down well with those who have the votes.
(05-02-2014- Hardeep S. Puri, a retired diplomat, recently joined the BJP. The views expressed are personal. He can be reached at hardeepsinghpuri@yahoo.com)
Posted on 06 February, 2014, No Comments Comments admin
On July 27, 2008 three BJP MPs viz. Faggan Singh Kulaste, Mahabir Singh Bhagora and Ashok Argal were attempted to be bribed. They recorded the act of bribe giving wherein an offer was made to them to accept money and vote in favour of the Government in the vote of confidence taken on the Civil Nuclear Deal with the United States. After recording the act of bribe-giving they immediately went to Parliament; produced the money on the floor of the House; and exposed the fact that bribes were being offered to MPs to cross-vote in favour of the Government. The case was investigated by the Delhi Police and the three MPs as whistleblowers were charged for an offence for being a part of the conspiracy in giving and accepting bribe. Along with the alleged bribe-givers, three whistleblowers were arrested. Later on they were released on bail. A charge-sheet was filed before the Special Judge, CBI in Delhi. On November 22, 2013 Shri Narottam Kaushal, the Special Judge, CBI in Delhi discharged the three whistleblowers along with some others. The learned judge categorically stated-
“The meeting of minds or agreement between the accused, CNN-IBN team and three BJP MPs was only regarding collection of evidence on horse-trading and exposing leaders of Congress Party and Samajwadi Party, who were indulging in corrupt activity to lure vulnerable MPs of other parties. The said act cannot be said to be illegal or a legal act with illegal means; so as to attract a charge u/s 120-B IPC”.
The same order was also extended to two other whistleblowers viz. Sudheendra Kulkarni and Suhail Hindustani. The Judge in relation to these two accused further observed, “His presence with accused BJP MPs during later part of the events with the knowledge that proceedings were being recorded by CNN-IBN team and his active participation therein indicates that he was one of the actors playing his role in the drama being enacted to entrap bribe giver”.
This judgment was a significant victory for those who were campaigning for the rights of the whistleblowers and grant of protection to them. India needs more whistleblowers so that acts of corruption can be exposed. The Lok Sabha has already passed the Whistleblowers Bill and the same is pending before the Rajya Sabha. If there is any window of opportunities for legislation, which is available in this session, I do hope that this Bill can be passed at the earliest.
The newspapers today carry a detailed news item that the AAP Government has decided to appeal against this verdict. The AAP ostensibly claims to be a product of a movement which campaigned for the Lokpal and the Whistleblowers legislation. It, therefore, surprises me that one of the earliest decisions of the AAP Government would be to challenge the discharge of whistleblowers by a competent court. Admittedly, people cross voted in the vote of confidence in July, 2008. Admittedly monies were being offered to the MPs. Admittedly the three MPs with two of their colleagues enacted the whole drama of receiving bribe and getting an independent TV channel to record the same. They exposed one of the greatest scandals in independent India’s history. They were wrongly charged, and rightly discharged.
That Mr. Arvind Kejriwal and his government would now plead for prosecution of the whistleblowers comes to me and many others as a matter of surprise. But then political consistency is becoming unknown for some. Interestingly, Mr. Kejriwal is exhorting everybody to do sting operation on corrupt officials. But were the Aam Admi party’s standards to be applied to such cases, then everybody would be guilty under 120-B of IPC.
Posted on 05 February, 2014, No Comments Comments admin
The Home Minister Mr. Sushil Kumar Shinde today wanted the leave of the House to introduce the Prevention of Communal Violence (Access to Justice and Reparations) Bill, 2014. I objected to the introduction of the Bill on the ground of lack of legislative competence in the Parliament to enact the law. My opposition was based on the legislative entries contained in the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution. List II of the Seventh Schedule is the State list. Entry 1 deals with the Public Order. Entry 2 deals with Police and Entry 41 deals with the Public services of the States. These are matters exclusively within the domain of the State. The central legislature has no legislative competence to enact on these issues.
The Bill as proposed creates a new category of offences. It deals with declaration and notification of areas which are disturbed areas. It suggests steps for prevention of acts in relation to communal violence. It has a chapter dealing with maintenance of public order. It then deals with the compensation mechanism and action to be taken against officers of the state government and the penalties which can be imposed upon them. All these matters are exclusively within the domain of the state executive. The response of the union Law Minister was that federalism is not threatened as long as the power in relation to each of these subjects vests in the State executive. My response was that that there is a clear distinction between legislative power and the executive power. The legislative power is the power to enact a law. Executive power is a power under the legislation to undertake necessary steps. My objection was based on the lack of legislative competence. The Centre cannot say that by enacting, I am giving the power to the officers of the state because under List II, Entry 1, 2, 41 the power does not belong to the Centre in the first instance. Almost all Opposition parties supported the view taken by the BJP. The Bill has therefore rightly been deferred at the introduction stage itself.
Posted on 05 February, 2014, No Comments Comments admin
There are a large number of public appointments which are expected to be on non-partisan lines. Government is a political entity. Appointments which are exclusively made by the political executive in the government fail to inspire confidence. It is for this reason that the collegium system has been mooted in relation to several appointments. Currently, the chairman and the members of the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC), the Chief Vigilance Commissioner (CVC), Vigilance Commissioners, CIC and Information Commissioners and now the Chairperson and Members of the Lokpal are to be appointed by a collegium. The collegium for each of these appointments is differently constituted. The Leader of Opposition in the Lok Sabha is associated with each of these appointments. For the NHRC, even the Leader of Opposition in Rajya Sabha is a member of the collegium.
As Prime Minister Dr. Manmohan Singh’s tenure comes to an end, it is time for him to introspect the damage he has done to the collegium system. He puts on a veneer of straightforwardness but he is excessively political. When Shri Atal Bihari Vajpayee was the Prime Minister during the NDA regime, there was only one occasion where the two LOPs had dissented to an appointment. The appointment to which Mrs. Sonia Gandhi and Dr. Manmohan Singh dissented was that of the Chairman of the NHRC that the NDA had appointed. It is indeed embarrassing for Dr. Singh, along with his leader for having raised an objection to the appointment of Justice J.S. Verma as Chairman of the NHRC. There could not have been, at that stage, a candidate with better credentials that Justice Verma. His dissent was motivated by political considerations.
As a Prime Minister, he wanted to appoint a tainted person as the CVC. My colleague and the Leader of Opposition, Lok Sabha Smt. Sushma Swaraj dissented. Her dissent was upheld and the appointment of the CVC was struck down.
Even though the Lokpal law gives power to the four members to appoint the fifth member, the discretion of the four members was restricted for selecting seven members of the committee. The eminent jurist included Shri Mohan Gopal, a functionary of the Rajiv Gandhi Foundation. Smt. Swaraj is believed to have suggested that amongst the eminent jurists available, the best in the outstanding persons could be appointed. She suggested the names of the former CJI, Shri F.S. Nariman, Shri Soli Sorabjee, Shri K. Parasaran, and Shri Harish Salve. Smt. Swaraj would even have been agreeable to the names of Justice M N Venkatachaliah and Sh. K K Venugopal. The Prime Minister maintained a position that only one name could be considered that of Sh. P.P. Rao. None of the names suggested by Smt. Swaraj could be considered.
Sh. P.P. Rao is an honourable man. It is the Prime Minister’s insistence that none of the others could be considered and the government was only interested in P.P. Rao is what makes me doubt its intentions. The objective of having a Chief Justice or his nominee judge in the collegium was intended to maintain a balance. Ordinarily, in view of the divided opinion, the nominee judge was expected to come out with some outstanding name who would be acceptable by all. This did not happen.
Dr. Singh’s tenure as Prime Minister comes to an end soon. Amongst the various institutions that he has done damage to is the collegium system for making appointments to several public positions. As one of those who was actively involved in drafting of the Lokpal Law, I have started introspecting as to whether the collegium system can be so easily subverted in order to subvert the appointment of a Lokpal. The Prime Minister damaged the institution of Lokpal even prior to its appointment.
Posted on 04 February, 2014, No Comments Comments admin
Yesterday, when an Aam Aadmi Party MLA made some irresponsible statements without any supporting evidence dragging my name along with that of Narendra Modi in an unnecessary controversy, I had rubbished the charge. Today, to further pursue the allegations which the AAP has manufactured, they decided to hold a protest at my residence. I am convinced that AAP is a party of pathological liars. They create a falsehood and then convince themselves of its truth.
Let me now deal with the statement of the MLA named Madan Lal.
• Neither Narendra Modi nor I am aware of who is this Madan Lal, MLA.
• He claims that he was approached on telephone on 7th December,2013 with an offer to meet me.
• He does not know the name of the person who telephoned him. Nor does he know the number from where the phone came. He has not even checked his call data records to provide him the identity of the caller if such a call did exist.
• On 7th December,2013 the results of the Delhi election had not yet been declared. Madan Lal was not an MLA. Most people in Delhi did not visualize that he would be an MLA or that his party will get a sizeable number of seats. Why should somebody call him for a dubious purpose before his election as an MLA.
• He further claims that some 10-12 day ago some person from Gujarat approached him with a significant offer of bribe.
• He does not know the name of the person who approached him or his status or designation.
• He did not follow his party’s advice that bribe must be accepted and the bribe giver should be subjected to a sting operation.
• He chose to keep quiet for about 10 days.
• Curiously, the AICC General Secretary, Shakeel Ahmed made a statement about these incidents of alleged bribe giving an hour before Madan Lal’s Press Conference.
The absurdity of his claim is evident. The facts speak for themselves. But the AAP appears to be creating a falsehood, convince itself of its truth and keep pursuing the matter even if it is absurd and false on the face of it.