Sunday, December 12, 2010

Time to tell PM some unpleasant truths

I have been a warm supporter and admirer of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, but the time has come to pen some unpleasant truths. As finance minister years ago, he salvaged Indian economy from the corrupt controls and instituted the free market regime. He has an impeccable reputation for personal integrity. In his incarnation as Prime Minister, he established a durable bond of understanding and cooperation with the United States. His great achievement was the nuclear deal, relieving us from the pressures and disabilities of refusing to sign the Non-Proliferation Treaty. On the floor of Parliament I declared, to the chagrin of my friends on the Left, that a grateful nation must build a monument to his memory after he is gathered to his forefathers. Do I feel the same affection and veneration today? Unfortunately, no.

It is not without deep disappointment and anguish that I have watched his total failure to expose the corrupt and their horrible misdeeds. It seems like a cover-up and cooperation. A person's integrity does not consist merely in not accepting bribes. Its essential ingredient is loyalty to the nation and the courage to denounce the corrupt. The minimum expectation from an honest Prime Minister is that he should identify the corrupt to the nation and stop associating with them. I regret to say that Dr Manmohan Singh is surrounded by filth which he cannot but smell and see. By continuing as Prime Minister he is providing these criminals with a protective umbrella. He is paralysing the law-enforcing agencies and making judges look the other way. The few honest whistleblowers feel discouraged by fear of indifference, disapproval and reprisal.

The Prime Minister has to be a watchdog and guardian of the nation's meagre assets. Failure to act as one makes him a conspirator.

I have been compiling a chargesheet against my erstwhile icon. But the Hamlet in me raised doubts: Should I speak up or keep the truth from the people? The ethics of this paper finally forced the decision. Here is just one item in the list of long documents to follow next week and thereafter.

When the criminal court in Bhopal delivered its judgement sometime back, a wave of anger swept over the country. The victims of the Bhopal tragedy felt cheated. Startling facts came to light. Union Carbide chairman Warren Anderson, who had been earlier released on bail, was allowed to flee from the country, never to return and face investigation or trial. The Government by legislation proceeded to deprive the victims and their families of their right to fight Union Carbide and recover full recompense by judicial action. All the rights of the victims were vested in the Government. It appears that this was done not to help the victims but to help the Government and its favourites. Anderson could fly out of India without anyone noticing because the state Government flew him out in its own plane. In Delhi, before leaving India, he was the honoured guest of the high and mighty. When a person is released on bail pending investigation or trial the condition of bail invariably is that he should surrender his passport and not leave the country. After having made itself the owner of the victim's rights of action, the Government after long and laborious calculations quantified the total damage at US $3.3 billion. On the pretext that the Government urgently needed money for rehabilitation of the survivors, it settled the claim. None can accept the excuse as valid. The terms of the settlement were:

1. All criminal cases shall stand withdrawn and pending proceedings quashed.

2. All civil claims shall be deemed to be agreed upon payment of an amount which ostensibly had not yet been settled but which the parties were willing to leave to the Court.

3. When the Court inquired what would satisfy the Government of India they demanded not $3.3 billion, for which they had filed the suit, but only a paltry sum of $500 million, i.e., half billion, or 1/7th of the amount claimed in the plaint. Union Carbide pretended to offer US $425 million. The Court understandably fixed the amount midway between the two and decided that India will receive US $475 million only. The settlement was obviously dishonest. Who in the Government settled this matter is the main question. It is that person or persons who should be punished for the blatant criminal breach of trust and dacoity on the assets of the poor victims.

This is the first of a two-part article on corruption

http://www.sunday-guardian.com/a/282

No comments:

Post a Comment