By INDER MALHOTRA
THE United Progressive Alliance government has done great disservice to the country by its choice of the new Chief Vigilance Commissioner. In one fell swoop it has thrown to the winds all Constitutional properties and democratic decencies.
Above all, besides violating the spirit of the law under which the CVC is appointed, it has destroyed the sanctity of this exalted office whose job it is to enforce the strictest standards of probity and propriety on the army of central government functionaries across the board. Mr P J Thomas, formerly secretary of the Ministry of Telecommunications, certainly does not fit the bill.
It is no good for Union Home Minister, Mr P Chidambaram to say that though there were serious charges against Mr Thomas when he was serving as food and civil supplies secretary in Kerala, he was later exonerated. The irregularities in the import of 15,000 tons of palmolein had caused the state a loss of ` 2.8 crore. In the first place, media reports from the state, which no one has yet contradicted, state that, according to the Kerala Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau, the case against the new CVC has not been closed. It is only suspended because Mr K Karunakaran, the then chief minister who is also an accused, had gone to the Supreme Court to plead that the Assembly Speaker’s permission wasn’t obtained before launching the case against him. Mr Thomas is said to be the "eighth accused" in the suspended case.
However, let us overlook all this, and accept Mr Chidambaram’s word that the new CVC was indeed "cleared". But even that does not justify the government’s decision at all. For, given the nature of the CVC’s task of fighting corruption in an entire administration of this rampantly corrupt country, the incumbent of this post must be not only impeccably honest and upright but also there must not be even the slightest doubt about his integrity or the faintest blot on his copybook. In short, the CVC should be like Caesar’s wife – wholly above suspicion. Does Mr Thomas inspire such confidence?
Disquiet and Disappointment
Tragically, this is by no means all. The BJP and other critics have cited several documents, including an "internal, inter-ministerial note" purporting to show that in relation to the G-2 mega scam, Mr Thomas not only defended his minister, Mr A Raja (which might be said to be his "duty") but also told the then CVC, the Comptroller and Auditor-General (CAG) and the Central Bureau of Investigation that they had no authority to look into what was a matter of policy! He also resisted, apparently successfully, his predecessor’s move to arraign some officers of the telecom ministry. Now as CVC himself, would Mr Thomas go on protecting these individuals? In any case, what moral authority is he left with?
What compounds the whole sordid story is that the CVC is one of those officers–director of the CBI is another–whose selection is made by a committee consisting of the Prime Minister, the home minister and the leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha. Such decisions are usually taken by consensus. In this case, Ms Sushma Swaraj, for good reasons, objected to Mr Thomas but said that she would gladly accept either of the two other officers whose names were on the panel of three prepared by the Cabinet Secretary. It is incomprehensible therefore why Dr Singh and Mr Chidambaram should have overruled her summarily rather than have a unanimous decision. No wonder the BJP is protesting vigorously. It has taken the issue to the President and even boycotted the swearing-in of the new CVC. The matter is unlikely to end there. Others are also agitated.
An impressive array of former civil servants have expressed their "deep disquiet" and told me that the Cabinet Secretary should not have included Mr Thomas in the panel in the first place. They have expressed their disappointment over the stand the Prime Minister and the home minister took. Their constructive suggestion is that the best way out of the mess is that Mr Thomas should "persuade himself or be persuaded" to resign.
There are two other important facets of the dismal chain of events that must be faced squarely. As stated earlier the dispute over the CVC’s choice could have been avoided easily had the Prime Minister and home minister not clung to Mr Thomas’s candidature. Such a sensible denouement, apart from averting the undermining of the CVC’s post, would have had a beneficial impact also on Indian polity. After years of being not even on talking terms the BJP and the Congress had come together to pass the Nuclear Liability Bill after a certain amount of give and take. This healthy trend needed to be consolidated. Instead, it has been damaged, and it looks as if the era of inflamed polarisation would be back. Instead of wholesome co-operation between them on issues pertaining to national interest, the core of the ruling coalition and the principal opposition party might once again be confronting each other.
Influential Allies
Secondly, and more importantly, as far as can be ascertained, the reason that Dr Singh and Mr Chidambaram took such a stubborn position was that they were under heavy pressure from a "powerful" ally, the Dravid Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK). There seems to some link between the CVC’s selection, at least in the eyes of the DMK, and the future of the telecom minister, Mr A Raja who has now got a notice from the apex court to face some questions about the G-2 auctions in which the country reportedly lost ` 70,000 crore. According to some sources, the DMK patriarch, Mr M Karunanidhi, conveyed to all concerned that the Congress was "monopolising" all gubernatorial and constitutional posts, and it was time that the DMK got its share. If true, this is reminiscent of how Mr Karunanidhi’s bete noire, Ms J Jayalalithaa, failing to persuade the Vajpayee government to withdraw all the court cases instituted against her in Chennai, brought BJP-led coalition down, plunging the country into a fresh election within a year. The poll, ironically, brought the BJP-led National Democratic Alliance (NDA) with even greater majority.
Today the Congress is in a much stronger position than the BJP ever was. Indeed, neither BJP nor any other party wants to face a fresh election at this juncture. It is shocking therefore that the Congress should allow itself to be pushed around by its allies into making murky compromises even on matters of high principle. Ms Mamata Banerjee exploits this weakness even more than others in the UPA tent.
The Congress’ hope of winning a majority in Parliament on its own is understandable but unrealistic. India seems condemned to be ruled by coalitions for the foreseeable future. And if coalitions are going to be run as they have been so far, we might as well say farewell to any kind of governance, leave alone good governance.
