Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Wednesday, Jan 18, 2006
Google



Opinion
News: Front Page | National | Tamil Nadu | Andhra Pradesh | Karnataka | Kerala | New Delhi | Other States | International | Opinion | Business | Sport | Miscellaneous | Engagements |
Advts:
Classifieds | Employment |

Opinion - Editorials Printer Friendly Page   Send this Article to a Friend

Bhardwaj must go

A good scapegoat, the cynical saying goes, is almost as good as the solution to the problem. Exposed for the brazen conspiracy to facilitate the defreezing of the bank accounts of Bofors accused Ottavio Quattrocchi, the Central Government has laid the blame at the door of the Central Bureau of Investigation. The Centre could not have asked for a more submissive and willing scapegoat. The CBI, which until a couple of days ago more or less publicly distanced itself from the attempt to bail out Mr. Quattrocchi, has performed a flip-flop. After briefing reporters that it had nothing to do with Additional Solicitor General B. Datta's visit to London, where he informed the Crown Prosecution Service that there was no evidence to link two of Mr. Quattrocchi's bank accounts to the Bofors payoffs, the CBI has tamely assumed full responsibility for the developments that led to the defreezing of the accounts. In an unconvincing attempt to insulate the Congress party and the Central Government from the damage, the CBI has stated that "neither the Law Ministry nor the Department of Personnel and Training had any role to play" in lending Mr. Quattrocchi a helping hand. As if on cue, the Centre, through a statement by no less than Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, has `clarified' that l'affaire Quattrocchi was dealt with entirely by the investigative agency.

This amounts to a crude obfuscation of the CBI's longstanding differences with the Government on how to handle Mr. Quattrocchi's frozen funds — a subject that has been highlighted in the press. It is also a reflection of the political interference in the functioning of the CBI — a problem that continues to dog the country's premier investigative agency despite the Supreme Court's ruling that sought to insulate it from "extraneous factors" and give it a measure of functional autonomy (Vineet Narain vs Union of India, AIR 1998). Mr. Quattrocchi remains an accused under the Indian criminal justice system. Providing him assistance in unlocking his bank accounts — deposits that were allegedly linked to the Bofors payoffs and are under investigation — is tantamount to subverting the course of justice. From refusing to give the CBI clearance to appeal against the Delhi High Court February 2004 verdict to stretching a helping hand to Mr. Quattrocchi, the H.R. Bhardwaj-headed Law Ministry's approach to the Bofors issue provides a throwback to the cover-up methods of the late-1980s and the early 1990s. The country can ill afford a Law Minister who, at the bidding of others or otherwise, has given cause for widespread suspicion that he has unclean hands in a case that that has become emblematic of political corruption. In 1992, Madhavsinh Solanki was obliged to resign as External Affairs Minister following reports that he had asked his Swiss counterpart to go slow on the question of handing over secret bank documents to India relating to the Bofors kickbacks. The charges against the Union Law Minister are no less serious. There is only one way to restore some semblance of credibility in the Manmohan Singh Government's handling of the Bofors case. Mr. Bhardwaj must go immediately.

Printer friendly page  
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail



Opinion

News: Front Page | National | Tamil Nadu | Andhra Pradesh | Karnataka | Kerala | New Delhi | Other States | International | Opinion | Business | Sport | Miscellaneous | Engagements |
Advts:
Classifieds | Employment | Updates: Breaking News |


News Update


The Hindu Group: Home | About Us | Copyright | Archives | Contacts | Subscription
Group Sites: The Hindu | Business Line | The Sportstar | Frontline | Publications | eBooks | Images | Home |

Copyright © 2006, The Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of The Hindu