Opinion - News Analysis   

A Minister maligned and victimised

Every democratic institution, including the executive, legislative and judicative instrumentalities, is public property because it exercises public power. All state power is held in trust. Such power is accountable for its exercise to the people and for the good of the people. Even the Supreme Court is liable to criticism for its exercise of power.

Let me quote American jurist David Josiah Brewer: “It is a mistake to suppose that the Supreme Court is either honoured or helped by being spoken of as beyond criticism. On the contrary, the life and character of its justices should be the objects of constant watchfulness by all, and its judgments subject to the freest criticism. The time is past in the history of the world when any living man or body of men can be set on a pedestal and decorated with a halo. True, many criticisms may be, like their authors, devoid of good taste, but better all sorts of criticism than no criticism at all. The moving waters are full of life and health; only in the still waters is stagnation and death.” (Quote It, Volume I, Page 148)

The people of India are the ultimate masters under the Constitution that empowers them through appropriate instrumentalities to invigilate the exercise of authority, discover delinquencies and expose any mendacity by the custodians of executive power. Implicit in this public policy is a fundamental duty on the part of the critics to project the truth and nothing but the truth and never to hide or distort facts and events.

Any attempt to expose wrongdoing carries a serious responsibility implicit in this public process. No member of the public, high or humble, whether he or she is from the media or the mafia, shall make false, fallacious or frivolous accusations against Ministers, public servants or others discharging state functions, for such abuse will cast a slur on the authority concerned, weaken its morale and damage the credibility of the people in its state instrumentalities. It is in this dimension that the media, while publicising aspersions cast on high public authorities, should verify prima facie whether a given charge is well-founded or concocted, mendacious or veracious.

In a State where politicking is a professional-pathological operation, malignant political propaganda and acrimonious inventions become habitual indulgences involving vindictive lies and felonious fictions with an addictive flavour. While Ministers are accountable as part of state power, critics have an equal responsibility not to hurl charges out of vendetta or other ulterior objectives without making reasonable enquiries. In such cases, when false charges are exposed, it is democratic decency for the unjust accuser to apologise, especially when a court has subjected the aspersion to judicial scrutiny and found it to be unfounded.

Politics without principle and freedom of expression that violates moral values flourishes in Kerala since media outlets are many and some of them are ready to circulate dubious reports about persons in public positions. The Fourth Estate is a great democratic asset in exposing abuse of power, but equally frequently it commits vicious aberrations by giving undue publicity to certain matters without conducting a just investigation. It happens that certain persons, as self-appointed guardians of public interest, indulge in unveracity hurtful to persons in offices of power. In my view, the courts must apply stern standards in defending the reputation of those who hold delicate and difficult office and against whom it is easy to create suspicion without proof and get away with it because victims of such malevolence cannot go to court and vindicate his or her character.

Constitutional culture obligates citizens to desist from making frivolous, worthless and baseless imputations. They must face the consequences when the untruth of statements recklessly made is exposed through the judicial process. The trick of using suspicious material is vicious, because, as Robert Ingersoll wrote, “suspicion is the Upas tree under whose shade reason fails and justice dies.”

One such case is where Binoy Viswom, Kerala’s Minister for Forests, was victimised by a strange charge of conspiracy and corruption that ended in his acquittal by the High Court. The forests are rich and timber commands high prices. So the illicit sale of forest land and the felling of trees are sometimes done by resorting to bribery. The woods owned by the State present a dubious opportunity to make illegal wealth and a forest of lies is to be behind denuded forests and illegal transactions. The realty mafia accumulates wealth by corrupting those who control old and large and excellent trees. In Kerala, trees in well-preserved lands, under the control of the State, are assets that offer a keen temptation to illicit selling and stealing. The manipulation of forest land ownership and execution of tricky transfer deeds are a source of unearned income through connivance or abetment by forest officials.

Some Ministers of weak character may well be vulnerable to money making opportunities. Power, at the level of a Minister, can facilitate fraudulent deals. But honest Ministers whose probity is beyond purchase and whose vigilance in defending public resources under their control is matchless, should not be allowed to be demoralised by mafia elements making utterly unfounded allegations of corruption. The motive is to intimidate fine Ministers into submission by making reckless charges of underhand deeds involving unscrupulous stratagems.

Mr. Viswom is a man of exemplary character, impossible to reach at any price. Forests of great value are secure under his ministerial supervision. Realty contractors imputed a shady role to the Minister in the Merchiston estate episode. It was found to be without foundation and the Minister was cleared by the High Court in a powerful pronouncement. A perusal of the judgment confirming the favourable findings of the Sessions Judge should normally be enough to liquidate all possible suspicions that were sought to be created to malign his name. His character is the straight Minister’s great asset.

That is why I wish to emphasise that whatever be one’s view about the Minister’s ideology or the general reputation of the Forest Department, the inalienable integrity and personal cleanliness of Mr. Viswom are beyond doubt. That being my conviction, based on my relations with him and the clear inference available from the judgment, the public should abolish the libellous traces from his reputation. I belong to no party and am critical of infirmity in government whenever I observe any flaw. But truth must be told. Everyone has a right to his reputation.

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

Stories in this Section

Averting temple stampedes
Unrelenting inflation
A three-horse race in the next election
Corrections and clarifications
Dealing with terror strategies
A Minister maligned and victimised
Gilani’s response
Ahmedabad blasts
SAARC concerns
Temple stampede
Tinderbox coaches
Liberty on two wheels

Copyright © 2008, The Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of The Hindu