Friday, March 4, 2011

It's about the PM, not P.J.Thomas

"The papers and file were not so circulated. It was not before the committee. The material pertaining to the sanction for prosecution under Section 120 B of the Indian Penal Code was not before the committee. " So said the Attorney General of India to the Supreme Court of India. The papers he is talking about pertains to a charge sheet filed against (amongst others) P.C.Thomas, Kerala cadre IAS officer, in a corruption case in the 90's. Before what Committee were these papers not circulated? The committee that will choose the next Vigilance Commissioner of India.

Whom does the committee comprise of? The Prime Minister of India, the Home Minister of India and the Leader of Opposition in the Lok Sabha. So now are you getting the picture? The government submits to the court that the Prime Minister of this country was not apprised of the full facts of a corruption case pertaining to the appointment of a man as the watchdog of corruption in this country. This despite the fact that the Leader of Opposition has publicly disagreed to this appointment, citing this same case. Details of this case were all over the news, but somehow the honourable Prime Minister did not know about this.

Later, another member of the committee, Shri P. Chidambaram, tells us that this case was infact discussed within the committee. So then who is lying? When asked, we are told that this matter is sub-judice and no further comments will be made. Fine then - we all decided to wait for the Supreme Court to decide.

And yesterday, Supreme Court spoke. In a 73 page judgement, the Supreme Court has quashed the appointment of P.J.Thomas as the Central Vigilance Commissioner. It has said that this committee has failed to take into consideration the details of the charges pending against him. To reiterate again, the commitee has the PM, HM and Leader of Oppn in LS. Leader of Opposition has in writing, objected to this appointment citing these same cases. The Prime Minister and Home Minister did not bother to listen to her, verify her claims or even justify their decision.

The question now is not whether P.J.Thomas is corrupt or not. There is a case pending against him (we don't know if he is guilty or not), and quite clearly that makes him ineligible for the post. So why was the Prime Minister insistent on this appointment? Why was he insistent in damaging another institution? Why did the most "honest" PM ever, decide to make this appointment? This same "honest" Prime Minister has presided over some unimaginable range of corruption, but got away with it by saying he was helpless (which in itself is a very damaging statement. The highest political authority being helpless when his own minister is looting, is actually a shame). In this particular case, he himself made the appointment. So was he helpless too? If so, was it because of Sonia Gandhi? If not, why this insistence on one man? He owes an explanation to the country.

This perhaps is the first time, the Supreme Court has quashed a direct appointment by the Prime Minister. If this isn't alarming enough, then what is?

4 comments:

Jiggs said...

Sudhir...

One important fact LoP Lok Sabha Sushma Swaraj further said she had no objection to the other two short listed candidates for the post, but this was rudely rejected by PM & HM.

There is no question that the PM or the HM were not aware of the pending case against Shri. P J Thomas, as Sushma Swaraj specifically pointed this out.

I-Ore Trading said...

Hi Sudhir,

Questioned posed by are the very same that we are asking. We need answers to these! Will we get them is the issue?

The Home Minister & the Prime Minister both must take responsibility for this fiasco and it is a fit case for both to relinquish office without any delay.

Congress can issue any amount of justifications and clarification. People of this country have a right to demand that corrupt do not stay in office any more.

Sincerely
Anil Kohli

Anonymous said...

It is time for our honest PM to show his honesty.

kppradeep said...

I remember once Dr Swamy told that the term SubJudice does not arise in India because we do not have a jury system. The CON men of #CONgress will use the same term when ever it suits them but will raise a big hue & cry when Gujarat riots is discussed. At that time they will never use the term subjudice

Post a Comment