Opinion The corporate vote

The editorial argues there is nothing wrong with Indian firms investing abroad in a globalised world. “The problem is when it starts pinching the domestic economy,affects growth,investment and employment generation and disincentivises FDI inflow. This also is a reflection of the corporate perception that there are better,more profitable destinations for investment,” it says.

“In a way,it is an expression of no-confidence by corporates on the present regime. Has Manmohan Singh done anything to the arrest of this trend? No. In fact,the UPA government is wilfully encouraging this flight of Indian capital. This at a time,when FDI inflows from the rest are drying up. Other Asian countries have emerged stronger contenders for foreign investment,” it says.

“The UPA,it seems,is bent on instigating a capital flight from India. It has created a super-cabinet of frustrated,retired babus,over-ground Maoists and Left fellow-travellers as Sonia’s advisory club,which obstructs all economic reforms. This Sonia club has devised a number of schemes to perpetuate poverty in the country and create a captive votebank for the dynasty,” it concludes.

Judge not

In an article in Organiser,Rajya Sabha member and former chief justice of the Punjab and Haryana high Court,M. Rama Jois argues against bringing judges of the Supreme Court and high courts under the ambit of the Lokpal. Observing that opinion appears to be divided on this question,he says: “Having regard to the scheme of the Constitution and the exalted position assigned to the Supreme Court under the Constitution,the answer to the question has to be in the negative.” He bases his argument on the unanimous decision of a seven-judge SC bench in the 1997 L. Chandra Kumar case,from which it follows that the proposed Lokpal would be amenable to the writ jurisdiction of the high courts under Article 226 and the Supreme Court under Article 32 and Article 136 of the Constitution.

“Even if an amendment to the Constitution were to be made providing for excluding the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court and the high courts in respect of matters falling within the jurisdiction of Lokpal,such provision would be unconstitutional and liable to be struck down in view of the ratio of the judgment of the Supreme Court in Kumar’s case,” he argues. While admitting that the impeachment provisions against Supreme Court and high court judges are “difficult and impractical”,he said “that is no reason to bring them under Lokpal and bring them down from the exalted position assigned to them by the founding fathers of the Constitution”. He favours an alternative procedure that would not affect their security of tenure.

Rifts in government

The Panchjanya reads a deeper conspiracy into the attempted bugging of Finance Minister Pranab Mukherjee’s office as reported by The Indian Express last week. Echoing the BJP line,it says the bugging could be a result of internal rivalry within the Congress or prompted by big business lobbies. “But this government does not want the truth to come out,” it says. “There are several unanswered questions. Primarily,the fact that the complaint was made by none other than Finance Minister Pranab Mukherjee himself in a letter to the prime minister requesting a secret probe.

“This should normally have been treated as a security incident,which is the responsibility of the home ministry,but by writing to the PM,Mukherjee displayed his no-confidence in the home ministry. This has brought Home Minister P. Chidambaram under suspicion,” the article says.