![]() Online edition of India's National Newspaper Saturday, Dec 10, 2005 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Opinion |
|
News:
Front Page |
National |
Tamil Nadu |
Andhra Pradesh |
Karnataka |
Kerala |
New Delhi |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Miscellaneous |
Engagements |
Advts: Classifieds | Employment | Obituary |
Opinion
-
Editorials
Fresh from a morale-boosting victory in Bihar, the Bharatiya Janata Party has returned to its favourite legislative pastime disrupting House proceedings, staging noisy walkouts, and forcing adjournments. The flavour of this winter season is, naturally, Volcker. No Opposition party was likely to pass up an opportunity such as the one presented by the report, which named K. Natwar Singh and the Congress party as `non-contractual beneficiaries' of oil quotas allotted by the Saddam Hussein regime in an alleged manipulation of the United Nation's Oil-For-Food programme. The volatile mix of internationally known individuals, political entities, and business houses named in the Volcker report presented a picture of global loot and scoot and the media added plenty of spice to this. The Indian part of the drama centred on the doings of Mr. Singh's son, Jagat, and his buddy Andaleeb Sehgal. Unsurprisingly, the BJP went for the kill. The relentless offensive saw Mr. Singh lose one prized post after another his External Affairs Ministry, his place in the Congress Steering Committee, finally his position as Minister without portfolio. A hapless Pranab Mukerjee was to tell the Rajya Sabha that Mr. Singh had resigned ahead of the Prime Minister's return from Moscow so that the principal Opposition party would spare the House. Happily for the BJP, all of this happened without the party having to prove anything against Mr. Singh. That the Volcker report condemned Mr. Singh on the basis of unverified records and without notice or hearing is clear enough. There is absolutely nothing to connect the scandal with Sonia Gandhi. All this has not deterred BJP stalwarts from going on a witch-hunt against the Congress president who has handled the matter with dignity and straightforwardness. To be sure, the party's image was needlessly damaged by the slowness of the United Progressive Alliance Government's response. A fortnight ago, Ms. Gandhi admitted publicly she was "hurt" and "very angry" that the Congress' name had been sought to be used. The `off-the-record' remarks of Aneil Mathrani, a member of the Congress' January 2001 delegation to Baghdad, dealt another blow to Mr. Singh, who was summarily removed from the CSC. This action was followed by a veiled warning from the Congress spokesperson that Mr. Singh continued in the Cabinet at his own peril. A meeting with Ms Gandhi settled the matter. At worst, this sequence suggests confused strategy on the part of the Congress and the Government. It is by no means an admission of guilt. Indeed, the ruling party as well as the Government deserve to be complimented on setting a healthy precedent at a time cover-up and obfuscation have become the norm in dealing with political corruption. Rather than demand the resignation of Ms. Gandhi against whom there is not a shred of evidence, the BJP ought to turn the mirror inward and reflect on its own unedifying handling of the Tehelka affair.
Printer friendly
page
News:
Front Page |
National |
Tamil Nadu |
Andhra Pradesh |
Karnataka |
Kerala |
New Delhi |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Miscellaneous |
Engagements |
|
|
|
The Hindu Group: Home | About Us | Copyright | Archives | Contacts | Subscription Group Sites: The Hindu | Business Line | The Sportstar | Frontline | The Hindu eBooks | The Hindu Images | Home |
Copyright © 2005, The
Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of
this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of
The Hindu
|