Invoking House,Singhvi steps down

Singhvi,however,didn’t clarify whether he was also resigning as Congress spokesperson,only saying: “I have also decided not to brief the press.”

Congress sources,however,asserted that he has ceased to be a spokesperson and will lose his party posts,including as chairman of the AICC Legal & Human Rights Department,in the next reshuffle.

Shortly after the CD surfaced about 10 days ago,the party had removed Singhvi from roster duty as spokesman. Subsequently,with the CD circulating on the social media and the BJP planning to corner the UPA by raising the issue of ethics in Parliament,the party leadership was learnt to have asked Singhvi to resign.

Congress media department chairman Janardan Dwivedi today said that whether the party had asked him to resign or he did it of his own volition was “the same thing”. “Abhishek Singhvi has taken the step on the basis of whatever situation has come to the fore. It is the right step,” said Dwivedi.

Singhvi’s driver stated in court that he had “fabricated the CD.” But the ethical and political dimensions of the controversy could not be wished away. Despite the court injunction against it,the CD was being freely circulated on YouTube and Facebook. As Standing Committee chairman,Singhvi incidentally had steered the Lokpal Bill that strives for transparency in public life.

“Since I am a disciplined party soldier,I did not think it fit to subject the party to any inconvenience on this account… I wish to categorically state that canards and baseless allegations are being spread about alleged inappropriate conversation in the CD,” he said.

Singhvi denied that there was any reference in the CD to promise of any post. “No one has heard any such reference in the CD. There is none, simply because it does not exist. It is pure imagination,wishful thinking and sensationalism. The canard was spread simply to give the issue a public interest flavour since otherwise the contents of the CD,assuming them to be true (which they certainly are not),would disclose only something private and consensual giving a cause of action only to aggrieved family members (who have stood completely by me) and to no one else,” stated Singhvi.

According to Singhvi,people “inimically opposed” to him spent over 10 days hearing,seeing,amplifying and distilling the CD and found no vestige of any reference,not even remotely,“to any illegality,corrupt practice,or wrongdoing”.

“Either the CD is morphed or it is not. In either event,it raises no public interest issue,yet evokes salacious private and prurient interest and contumacious internet violation of a flagrant kind. As a political or a professional class,instead of gleefully watching,promoting or participating in a person’s natural and understandable discomfiture,we must respect privacy issues,” he said.

He termed it as lamentable that canards were being spread about a CD which had been accepted thrice over to be fabricated and morphed. The driver’s disclosure statement to the police,his detailed written statement in the high court and his statement recorded on oath physically in the presence of the judge,all explain how and why he created this fabrication,according to Singhvi.