Jab versus counter-jab

Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s impassioned statement in Parliament was correct in two respects. The opposition should not play a game of innuendo by suggesting that the PM was trying to prevent General Musharraf from seeing Atal Bihari Vajpayee. He was also correct in suggesting that the opposition should not play politics with Parliament. The BJP, in line with the assurances they had apparently given to the PM, should have returned to Parliament.

But the PM omitted to mention a crucial fact. It is the UPA government’s politics of innuendo that has created an impasse at least as much as the opposition’s behaviour. For months now, the UPA government has not only been targeting leaders like George Fernandes, it has now raised the spectre of endless investigations against other former ministers, including Arun Shourie. The real divide between the UPA and the BJP stems from the BJP’s fear that the government is using state investigations to target their members. The BJP’s fears are not entirely unfounded. It was a little disingenuous of the PM not to address this issue. Nobody would argue that the state should not pursue investigation into corruption by previous governments. But the manner in which this government has handled these matters suggests that it is more interested in harassing the opposition than in the truth. The indiscriminate manner in which 23 cases are being handed over to the CBI in the case of Fernandes gives substance to this charge. Similarly, ministers have been hurling innuendoes against Shourie. If the government has a case, it should make it according to proper procedure. Ministers should not use their privileged access to information to simply threaten investigations or trade in charges. There is also an unhealthy trend to assume that CAG reports are definitive and have to be accepted in toto. The government has to learn to confine its investigations to genuine wrongdoing. Instead, minor procedural lapses are built up into a fog of suspicion to target particular individuals. Energy is diverted from cases that genuinely need to be pursued, as a result.

We are reaching a situation where executive officials may well conclude that the only way to avoid suspicion is to not take any decisions at all. But, most importantly, Indian politics is in the grip of a vicious cycle of framing charges and counter-charges. This is the real cause of the present impasse in Parliament. The PM could show real statesmanship by ensuring that his government does not engage in the politics of frivolous investigations and innuendo. Given that the UPA itself has its share of tainted ministers, it is in its own interest not to trade in investigations and charges too easily. It has to assure the opposition and the citizens that these investigations are about the truth, not about collecting debating points.