Guilt-edged ministry

The fact that a politician with a murder charge to his name could have made his way to the highest echelons of government speaks volumes for...

The fact that a politician with a murder charge to his name could have made his way to the highest echelons of government speaks volumes for the felicity with which crime and politics have come to coexist in India. It would be easy to dismiss the case of Bihar minister, Ramashray Shahni, who has just been sentenced along with 11 others by a fast track court to life imprisonment for the murder of a policeman 20 years ago, as just another example of the RJD brand of politics in Bihar.

It is that, of course, but let it also not be forgotten that there are many who are alleged to have committed grave crimes who continue to adorn ministerial posts in several other state governments. Indeed, an Intelligence Bureau report has just indicted the Union tribal affairs minister for bribery.

While it is true that everyone has the right to be presumed innocent unless proven guilty 8212; and the Draft Representation of the People Amendment Bill 2000 tries to ensure this by stating that a person can only be disqualified as a political candidate if he is charged in two separate cases 8212; political parties owe it to themselves to take action against dodgy individuals when there is reason to suspect their crime-free credentials. However, what emerges from the Ramashray Shahni case in Bihar is that parties are themselves guilty of seeking to benefit from the notoriously slow pace of the criminal justice system in the country, by allowing the criminals in their ranks access to power instead of punishing them by depriving them of it.

The RJD waited 20 years before taking action 8212; or being forced to take action 8212; against Shahni. If the fast track court had not pronounced Shahni guilty of murder, the Rabri Devi government would have had no problem in continuing with a minister with known criminal antecedents.

It is precisely this known reluctance of the political order to reform itself that forced the Supreme Court in its May 2 judgement to issue direction to the executive to make information about the criminal background of candidates available to the voter.

However, reform in electoral law can only aid this process of weeding out unsavoury characters from public life. What is vital is to speed up the judicial process itself so that politicians found guilty are punished within a reasonable span of time and are consequently denied access to the apparatuses of power.