Tags:
Journalism of Courage
Are Governors well placed to judge criminal matters? The question comes sharply into focus with the latest developments in the LOC scandal in Assam. It was obviously a tough decision for Governor S.K. Sinha to make on the CBI8217;s case against Prafulla Kumar Mahanta. His reason for rejecting the plea for prosecution of the Assam Chief Minister is the lack of prima facie evidence of criminal culpability. But as the Raj Bhavan Press release makes clear, it was not a cut and dried matter. Sinha is constrained to hold Mahanta, who was chief minister and finance minister at the time, morally and politically responsible for what is described as a quot;massive fraudquot;. In better times this would be damaging enough for a politician8217;s reputation to require a voluntary resignation. Not so today. Sinha has gone to some lengths to be seen to be fair by pointing to the concurring opinion of former justices of the Supreme Court whose reputation for impartiality is well known, and by delivering an answer within the shortestpossible time. But at the end of the day, what the text of the Governor8217;s statement suggests is not an exoneration nor an end to doubts about the Chief Minister8217;s role in the Rs 48 crore racket. It only shows that the circumstantial evidence produced by the CBI against him was inconclusive.
The recurring question of why so many of the CBI8217;s cases tend to be thrown out and other broad issues need examination. No one disputes the fact that people holding high office are in a vulnerable position in that they can be unwittingly implicated in the misdeeds of others. Also, what seem to be logical deductions about ministers8217; actions may not necessarily stand the test of evidence in court. Raj Bhavans have an added responsibility in that they must take into account the political consequences of their judgements. They will therefore be abundantly cautious in weighing circumstantial evidence pointing to ministerial wrong-doing.
