04-08-2006, 12:49 AM
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>AG gives Chawla 'clean chit' as PM ignores Constitution </b>
Pioneer News Service / New Delhi
In a brazen attempt to skirt the charges of impropriety levelled by the Opposition BJP-led National Democratic Alliance against Election Commissioner Navin Chawla, the UPA Government appears to be working towards giving him a "clean chit" by short-circuiting the laid down Constitutional procedure.
On March 16, the NDA had submitted a petition to President APJ Abdul Kalam, seeking his intervention under Article 324(5) of the Constitution for the removal of Mr Chawla, who was appointed Election Commissioner on May 16, 2005, from office on the ground that he cannot play a non-partisan role given his partisan background.
In the petition, signed by 205 Opposition MPs, NDA had recalled Mr Chawla's role as a bureaucrat during Indira Gandhi's Emergency and pointed out his proximity to Congress president Sonia Gandhi and her family, as well as the fact that trusts run by him had received substantial donations from the local area development funds of Congress MPs and were allotted land at discounted rate even while he was in service.
Curiously, official sources say that the file relating to Mr Chawla seeking permission in 1994 from the Personnel Department to run a trust has "gone missing". This bizarre fact has come to light after the Home Ministry sent a query to the Personnel Department, wanting to know whether Mr Chawla was given official permission to run these trusts and solicit funds for them while serving the Government as an IAS officer.
The NDA had sought Mr Chawla's immediate removal on the ground that he could not be expected to act in a fair and non-partisan manner under Article 324 (5).
The Article stipulates that the Election Commissioner can be removed by the President; that grounds on which the Election Commissioner can be removed should be grounds, which otherwise disentitle him from functioning effectively and independently as Election Commissioner and render him unfit to discharge functions as an Election Commissioner; and, that this decision to remove should be based on the recommendations of the Chief Election Commissioner.
The President had forwarded the petition to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh for further action, essentially to seek the recommendations of Chief Election Commissioner BB Tandon.
It now transpires that instead of seeking Mr Tandon's opinion on the complaint lodged by the NDA, Mr Singh forwarded it to Attorney-General Milon Banerjee. According to sources, Mr Banerjee is understood to have given a "clean chit" to Mr Chawla.
These sources say that Mr Banerjee is believed to have informed the Prime Minister that Mr Chawla had "not indulged in any misconduct as Election Commissioner". The Attorney-General's 'opinion' has nothing to do with the Opposition's complaint.
The NDA's petition was not about Mr Chawla's conduct as Election Commissioner, but his antecedents as a bureaucrat with a pronounced political bias and declared association with the Nehru-Gandhi family, especially his proximity to Congress president Sonia Gandhi.
Mr Chawla's background, in effect, the NDA had argued at length in its petition, disentitles him from functioning effectively and independently as Election Commissioner and renders him unfit to discharge functions as an Election Commissioner with impartiality.
Reacting to the reported "clean chit" given to Mr Chawla by Mr Banerjee, BJP general secretary Arun Jaitley told the Pioneer: "The matter has to be sent to the Chief Election Commissioner for his opinion, not the Attorney-General. The petition filed with the President was under Article 324(5) which clearly lays down the guidelines for action."
Mr Jaitley insisted that the Attorney-General has no role to play in this matter.<b> "If he has given a clean chit to Mr Chawla who has a partisan past, then he has acted as an interloper... he has usurped the role of the Chief Election Commissioner."</b>
The UPA Government, he said, <b>"is blocking the matter from going to the Chief Election Commissioner... This Government is guilty of parking a partisan official in the Election Commission."</b>
<span style='font-size:14pt;line-height:100%'>Another senior Opposition leader commented, "Mr Milon Banerjee is a retainer of 10, Janpath and he has given a clean chit to a fellow retainer. This is extremely strange and totally unacceptable."</span>
If the Prime Minister were to decide against forwarding the NDA's petition to the Chief Election Commissioner on the basis of the Attorney-General's misplace and uncalled for 'opinion', then not only would the UPA Government be guilty of committing yet another gross Constitutional impropriety, but also of blatantly disregarding the Opposition's complaint of stuffing the Election Commission with partisan officials.
It would further reinforce the Opposition's stand that the Prime Minister is not his own master and is forced to do 10, Janpath's bidding. After all, this is precisely how the decision to defreeze Mr Ottavio Quattocci's London bank accounts, allegedly containing part of the Bofors payola, was covered up.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Another Judge Banerjee in action <!--emo&
--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Pioneer News Service / New Delhi
In a brazen attempt to skirt the charges of impropriety levelled by the Opposition BJP-led National Democratic Alliance against Election Commissioner Navin Chawla, the UPA Government appears to be working towards giving him a "clean chit" by short-circuiting the laid down Constitutional procedure.
On March 16, the NDA had submitted a petition to President APJ Abdul Kalam, seeking his intervention under Article 324(5) of the Constitution for the removal of Mr Chawla, who was appointed Election Commissioner on May 16, 2005, from office on the ground that he cannot play a non-partisan role given his partisan background.
In the petition, signed by 205 Opposition MPs, NDA had recalled Mr Chawla's role as a bureaucrat during Indira Gandhi's Emergency and pointed out his proximity to Congress president Sonia Gandhi and her family, as well as the fact that trusts run by him had received substantial donations from the local area development funds of Congress MPs and were allotted land at discounted rate even while he was in service.
Curiously, official sources say that the file relating to Mr Chawla seeking permission in 1994 from the Personnel Department to run a trust has "gone missing". This bizarre fact has come to light after the Home Ministry sent a query to the Personnel Department, wanting to know whether Mr Chawla was given official permission to run these trusts and solicit funds for them while serving the Government as an IAS officer.
The NDA had sought Mr Chawla's immediate removal on the ground that he could not be expected to act in a fair and non-partisan manner under Article 324 (5).
The Article stipulates that the Election Commissioner can be removed by the President; that grounds on which the Election Commissioner can be removed should be grounds, which otherwise disentitle him from functioning effectively and independently as Election Commissioner and render him unfit to discharge functions as an Election Commissioner; and, that this decision to remove should be based on the recommendations of the Chief Election Commissioner.
The President had forwarded the petition to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh for further action, essentially to seek the recommendations of Chief Election Commissioner BB Tandon.
It now transpires that instead of seeking Mr Tandon's opinion on the complaint lodged by the NDA, Mr Singh forwarded it to Attorney-General Milon Banerjee. According to sources, Mr Banerjee is understood to have given a "clean chit" to Mr Chawla.
These sources say that Mr Banerjee is believed to have informed the Prime Minister that Mr Chawla had "not indulged in any misconduct as Election Commissioner". The Attorney-General's 'opinion' has nothing to do with the Opposition's complaint.
The NDA's petition was not about Mr Chawla's conduct as Election Commissioner, but his antecedents as a bureaucrat with a pronounced political bias and declared association with the Nehru-Gandhi family, especially his proximity to Congress president Sonia Gandhi.
Mr Chawla's background, in effect, the NDA had argued at length in its petition, disentitles him from functioning effectively and independently as Election Commissioner and renders him unfit to discharge functions as an Election Commissioner with impartiality.
Reacting to the reported "clean chit" given to Mr Chawla by Mr Banerjee, BJP general secretary Arun Jaitley told the Pioneer: "The matter has to be sent to the Chief Election Commissioner for his opinion, not the Attorney-General. The petition filed with the President was under Article 324(5) which clearly lays down the guidelines for action."
Mr Jaitley insisted that the Attorney-General has no role to play in this matter.<b> "If he has given a clean chit to Mr Chawla who has a partisan past, then he has acted as an interloper... he has usurped the role of the Chief Election Commissioner."</b>
The UPA Government, he said, <b>"is blocking the matter from going to the Chief Election Commissioner... This Government is guilty of parking a partisan official in the Election Commission."</b>
<span style='font-size:14pt;line-height:100%'>Another senior Opposition leader commented, "Mr Milon Banerjee is a retainer of 10, Janpath and he has given a clean chit to a fellow retainer. This is extremely strange and totally unacceptable."</span>
If the Prime Minister were to decide against forwarding the NDA's petition to the Chief Election Commissioner on the basis of the Attorney-General's misplace and uncalled for 'opinion', then not only would the UPA Government be guilty of committing yet another gross Constitutional impropriety, but also of blatantly disregarding the Opposition's complaint of stuffing the Election Commission with partisan officials.
It would further reinforce the Opposition's stand that the Prime Minister is not his own master and is forced to do 10, Janpath's bidding. After all, this is precisely how the decision to defreeze Mr Ottavio Quattocci's London bank accounts, allegedly containing part of the Bofors payola, was covered up.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Another Judge Banerjee in action <!--emo&
--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif' /><!--endemo-->