07-18-2005, 10:25 PM
Pioneer -18July
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Chawla as EC: Monstrous folly </b>
A Surya Prakash
<b>IAS officers told the Shah Commission of Enquiry that Mr Navin Chawla, then secretary to the Lieutenant Governor of Delhi, wanted them to detain persons under the dreaded MISA without examining the grounds of detention and to later 'fabricate' the evidence.</b> The Superintendent of Tihar Jail said that Mr Chawla wanted construction of cells with asbestos roofs to 'bake' certain persons and to throw some 'troublesome detenus' (read opponents of the Emergency) into the lunatics' cell.
Armed with this evidence and the testimony of many others including the then Lt Governor of Delhi, the Shah Commission, which inquired into the excesses during the Emergency, indicted Mr Chawla for having been 'authoritarian and callous' and for gross misuse of power "in cynical disregard of the welfare of citizens". Further, it declared that he was "unfit to hold any public office which demands an attitude of fair play and consideration for others".
Meet Mr Navin Chawla, a member of Sanjay Gandhi's extra-constitutional cabal, which snuffed out democracy and constitutionalism between June, 1975 and March, 1977. <b>Some weeks ago, the President, as the readers may be aware, was 'pleased' to appoint him as a member of Election Commission of India! For all those who have lived through that nightmare called the Emergency, the appointment of Mr Navin Chawla, a man completely at odds with democracy itself, as an Election Commissioner, constitutes a terrible folly that needs to be quickly undone.</b>
The Shah Commission Report provides ample evidence of Mr Chawla's cynical disregard of basic constitutional values. The Second Interim Report, submitted in April, 1978, dealt extensively with the ruthless manner in which some officers like him (he was Secretary to the Lt Governor of Delhi) misused their powers. Here is a brief summary: Additional District Magistrates Mr P Ghosh and Ms Meenakshi Dutta Ghosh (ADMs) told the commission that in a large number of cases, the grounds of detention were furnished to them after they issued detention orders. Mr P Ghosh said that Mr Navin Chawla had summoned him along with Mr GC Srivastava (another ADM) and told them 'to fabricate the grounds'. After a few days he was again summoned by Mr Chawla and was told that the Lt Governor "would not hesitate to put even senior IAS officers behind the bars under MISA if he found them lacking in cooperation in the matter of MISA detentions". Mr Srivastava told the commission that he was asked by Mr Navin Chawla to issue as many as 100 to 150 orders per month. "It is evident," the commission said that whether an individual should be detained under MISA or not was not left to the detaining authorities "but was decided by Shri Bhinder or by Shri Navin Chawla or Shri Bajwa".
However, even more disturbing was <b>the evidence of Mr Chawla's gestapo-style operations. The commission found that a special sub-committee had been constituted "to interrogate certain persons who had tendered apology for their past political activities".</b> This sub-committee included a psychiatrist. The commission said the purpose of this interrogation, conducted in jail, was to ascertain the genuineness of the political conversion of these persons. Ms Chandra, Special Secretary, Home, Delhi Government, told the commission that this special sub-committee was Mr Chawla's idea. "...one wonders if this was an attempt at political indoctrination of the opponents of the emergency regime," the commission observed.
The Shah Commission obtained clinching evidence of the extra-constitutional power wielded by Mr Chawla at that time. The then Lt Governor, Mr Krishan Chand, admitted that his Secretary had enormous powers when it came to throwing people in jail. He told the commission that whatever Mr Chawla said in regard to detentions was accepted. Further, <b>"Shri Krishan Chand has also said that the PM had handed over the running of Delhi to Shri Sanjay Gandhi and four-five officers who were close to Shri Gandhi used to receive direct orders from him. He has admitted that whenever some 'instructions' were given to him by Shri Navin Chawla, he took them to be emanating from Shri Sanjay Gandhi."</b>
This is an extraordinary confession by the man who was Delhi's Lt Governor during the Emergency. <b>He admitted that he received 'instructions' from his Secretary, Mr Navin Chawla!</b>
We now come to the most damning piece of evidence against Mr Chawla. Mr Batra, the Superintendent of Tihar Jail, told the commission that CBI and intelligence officials freely visited the jail and met the detenus on the orders of Mr Chawla. The commission observed that "though Shri Navin Chawla had no position in the jail hierarchy, he was exercising extra statutory control in jail matters. The Jail Superintendent told the commission that Mr Chawla had suggested the construction of some cells with asbestos roofs to 'bake' certain persons. A proposal to this effect was also processed but given up eventually due to certain technical reasons. Further, Mr Chawla had on one occasion suggested that certain troublesome detenus 'should be kept with the lunatics'."
Mr Chawla claimed that the Lt Governor had given him this task. The Lt Governor, however, denied having made Mr Chawla responsible for Tihar Jail in any manner.
Based on the oral and documentary evidence obtained by it, the commission delivered the following indictment:<b> "It is clear on the evidence that S/Shri PS Bhinder, KS Bajwa and Navin Chawla exercised enormous powers during the Emergency because they had easy access to the then prime minister's house. </b>Having acquired that power, they used it without considering whether the exercise was moral or immoral, legal or illegal. The commission is of the opinion that though the involvement of these officers may vary slightly in degree, their approach to the problems of the period relating to the citizens was authoritarian and callous. They grossly misused their position and abused their powers in cynical disregard of the welfare of citizens and in the process rendered themselves unfit to hold any public office which demands an attitude of fair play and consideration for others. In their relish for power they completely subverted the normal channels of command and administrative procedure." At another point the commission said, <b>"tyrants sprouted at all levels overnight - tyrants whose claim to authority was largely based on their proximity to power".</b>
The Union Government informed Parliament on May 15, 1978, in its 'Memorandum of Action Taken' that it had "accepted the findings, observations and recommendations of the commission". <b>Since the Union Government 'accepted' the recommendations of the commission and told Parliament so, how can Mr Navin Chawla, who is "authoritarian and callous" and "unfit to hold any public office which demands an attitude of fair play" become, of all things, an Election Commissioner?</b>
<b>Mr Chawla's appointment as EC is, therefore, a monstrous blunder.</b> The EC has the responsibility to not only conduct elections but also to protect political pluralism and deepen democracy. Therefore, an abiding commitment to democracy and the core values of our Constitution is a fundamental qualification for an Election Commissioner. Given the findings of the Shah Commission, how is one to believe that Mr Chawla will hold the scales even? <b>To elevate such a person to the office of Election Commissioner is the ultimate insult one can heap on the Constitution. The sooner this monstrous error is corrected, the better.</b>
In conclusion one must refer to yet another telling observation of the Shah Commission. It said: "A calculated effort was made to place persons in vital positions who were willing to further the interests of the centre of power in gross violation of established norms and practices." Are we now going to revisit that nightmare? Who proposed to make Mr Chawla an Election Commissioner? How committed is the promoter of this idea to democracy? Was the President, Mr APJ Abdul Kalam, informed of Mr Chawla's antecedents when the file was put before him? Mr Kalam must exert his moral authority on the Government and get it to undo the mischief. India's constitutional well-being cannot and should not be sacrificed for the sake of a partisan, undemocratic careerist.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Chawla as EC: Monstrous folly </b>
A Surya Prakash
<b>IAS officers told the Shah Commission of Enquiry that Mr Navin Chawla, then secretary to the Lieutenant Governor of Delhi, wanted them to detain persons under the dreaded MISA without examining the grounds of detention and to later 'fabricate' the evidence.</b> The Superintendent of Tihar Jail said that Mr Chawla wanted construction of cells with asbestos roofs to 'bake' certain persons and to throw some 'troublesome detenus' (read opponents of the Emergency) into the lunatics' cell.
Armed with this evidence and the testimony of many others including the then Lt Governor of Delhi, the Shah Commission, which inquired into the excesses during the Emergency, indicted Mr Chawla for having been 'authoritarian and callous' and for gross misuse of power "in cynical disregard of the welfare of citizens". Further, it declared that he was "unfit to hold any public office which demands an attitude of fair play and consideration for others".
Meet Mr Navin Chawla, a member of Sanjay Gandhi's extra-constitutional cabal, which snuffed out democracy and constitutionalism between June, 1975 and March, 1977. <b>Some weeks ago, the President, as the readers may be aware, was 'pleased' to appoint him as a member of Election Commission of India! For all those who have lived through that nightmare called the Emergency, the appointment of Mr Navin Chawla, a man completely at odds with democracy itself, as an Election Commissioner, constitutes a terrible folly that needs to be quickly undone.</b>
The Shah Commission Report provides ample evidence of Mr Chawla's cynical disregard of basic constitutional values. The Second Interim Report, submitted in April, 1978, dealt extensively with the ruthless manner in which some officers like him (he was Secretary to the Lt Governor of Delhi) misused their powers. Here is a brief summary: Additional District Magistrates Mr P Ghosh and Ms Meenakshi Dutta Ghosh (ADMs) told the commission that in a large number of cases, the grounds of detention were furnished to them after they issued detention orders. Mr P Ghosh said that Mr Navin Chawla had summoned him along with Mr GC Srivastava (another ADM) and told them 'to fabricate the grounds'. After a few days he was again summoned by Mr Chawla and was told that the Lt Governor "would not hesitate to put even senior IAS officers behind the bars under MISA if he found them lacking in cooperation in the matter of MISA detentions". Mr Srivastava told the commission that he was asked by Mr Navin Chawla to issue as many as 100 to 150 orders per month. "It is evident," the commission said that whether an individual should be detained under MISA or not was not left to the detaining authorities "but was decided by Shri Bhinder or by Shri Navin Chawla or Shri Bajwa".
However, even more disturbing was <b>the evidence of Mr Chawla's gestapo-style operations. The commission found that a special sub-committee had been constituted "to interrogate certain persons who had tendered apology for their past political activities".</b> This sub-committee included a psychiatrist. The commission said the purpose of this interrogation, conducted in jail, was to ascertain the genuineness of the political conversion of these persons. Ms Chandra, Special Secretary, Home, Delhi Government, told the commission that this special sub-committee was Mr Chawla's idea. "...one wonders if this was an attempt at political indoctrination of the opponents of the emergency regime," the commission observed.
The Shah Commission obtained clinching evidence of the extra-constitutional power wielded by Mr Chawla at that time. The then Lt Governor, Mr Krishan Chand, admitted that his Secretary had enormous powers when it came to throwing people in jail. He told the commission that whatever Mr Chawla said in regard to detentions was accepted. Further, <b>"Shri Krishan Chand has also said that the PM had handed over the running of Delhi to Shri Sanjay Gandhi and four-five officers who were close to Shri Gandhi used to receive direct orders from him. He has admitted that whenever some 'instructions' were given to him by Shri Navin Chawla, he took them to be emanating from Shri Sanjay Gandhi."</b>
This is an extraordinary confession by the man who was Delhi's Lt Governor during the Emergency. <b>He admitted that he received 'instructions' from his Secretary, Mr Navin Chawla!</b>
We now come to the most damning piece of evidence against Mr Chawla. Mr Batra, the Superintendent of Tihar Jail, told the commission that CBI and intelligence officials freely visited the jail and met the detenus on the orders of Mr Chawla. The commission observed that "though Shri Navin Chawla had no position in the jail hierarchy, he was exercising extra statutory control in jail matters. The Jail Superintendent told the commission that Mr Chawla had suggested the construction of some cells with asbestos roofs to 'bake' certain persons. A proposal to this effect was also processed but given up eventually due to certain technical reasons. Further, Mr Chawla had on one occasion suggested that certain troublesome detenus 'should be kept with the lunatics'."
Mr Chawla claimed that the Lt Governor had given him this task. The Lt Governor, however, denied having made Mr Chawla responsible for Tihar Jail in any manner.
Based on the oral and documentary evidence obtained by it, the commission delivered the following indictment:<b> "It is clear on the evidence that S/Shri PS Bhinder, KS Bajwa and Navin Chawla exercised enormous powers during the Emergency because they had easy access to the then prime minister's house. </b>Having acquired that power, they used it without considering whether the exercise was moral or immoral, legal or illegal. The commission is of the opinion that though the involvement of these officers may vary slightly in degree, their approach to the problems of the period relating to the citizens was authoritarian and callous. They grossly misused their position and abused their powers in cynical disregard of the welfare of citizens and in the process rendered themselves unfit to hold any public office which demands an attitude of fair play and consideration for others. In their relish for power they completely subverted the normal channels of command and administrative procedure." At another point the commission said, <b>"tyrants sprouted at all levels overnight - tyrants whose claim to authority was largely based on their proximity to power".</b>
The Union Government informed Parliament on May 15, 1978, in its 'Memorandum of Action Taken' that it had "accepted the findings, observations and recommendations of the commission". <b>Since the Union Government 'accepted' the recommendations of the commission and told Parliament so, how can Mr Navin Chawla, who is "authoritarian and callous" and "unfit to hold any public office which demands an attitude of fair play" become, of all things, an Election Commissioner?</b>
<b>Mr Chawla's appointment as EC is, therefore, a monstrous blunder.</b> The EC has the responsibility to not only conduct elections but also to protect political pluralism and deepen democracy. Therefore, an abiding commitment to democracy and the core values of our Constitution is a fundamental qualification for an Election Commissioner. Given the findings of the Shah Commission, how is one to believe that Mr Chawla will hold the scales even? <b>To elevate such a person to the office of Election Commissioner is the ultimate insult one can heap on the Constitution. The sooner this monstrous error is corrected, the better.</b>
In conclusion one must refer to yet another telling observation of the Shah Commission. It said: "A calculated effort was made to place persons in vital positions who were willing to further the interests of the centre of power in gross violation of established norms and practices." Are we now going to revisit that nightmare? Who proposed to make Mr Chawla an Election Commissioner? How committed is the promoter of this idea to democracy? Was the President, Mr APJ Abdul Kalam, informed of Mr Chawla's antecedents when the file was put before him? Mr Kalam must exert his moral authority on the Government and get it to undo the mischief. India's constitutional well-being cannot and should not be sacrificed for the sake of a partisan, undemocratic careerist.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->