01-17-2006, 11:53 AM
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Indian Express - Editorial
<b>Please join exit Q </b>
Tuesday, January 17, 2006
There are several things we donât know about the latest twist â how many have there been! â in the Bofors scandal. We donât know what was known by whom in the government and the Congress leadership, as the long arm of the law ministry reached out to give Ottavio Quattrocchi a helping hand in London. We donât know, at this point, whether Quattrocchi and his money will finally be reunited. We donât know why Quattrocchi said he has contributed to Indiaâs industrial development (figuring that one out is a challenge for economists). But we do know this â Law Minister H.R. Bhardwaj has never denied he lit the fire that may melt Quattrocchiâs bank account. And since the Supreme Court has directed that the status quo ante be restored in the matter, what option does that leave the law minister with? True, Bhardwaj saying heâs answerable to no one but the prime minister is an improvement on what Natwar Singh was saying before he was made to go. But that comparison itself damns the law minister.
More important, law ministers have to be especially sensitive to direct or implied strictures from courts, those from the highest court in particular. If they choose not to be, a crucial aspect of institutional integrity is lost. This requirement canât be masked by political-administrative manoeuvres â in this case, the CBI suddenly recalling that sending the additional solicitor general to London was absolutely, completely, its own independent, considered decision, and that no minister had anything to do with it. The best that can be said about this is that it fails even the test of amoral politics. If the idea was to deflect responsibility, it should have been done earlier, not after days of Bhardwaj defending the decision and after government leaks describing ministerial involvement.
The bad planning may be a sign of greater official discomfiture than has been admitted. If that is the case, the prime minister and Sonia Gandhi should know that feeling better wonât come from doing nothing<b>. To remind them: Ottavio Quattrocchi did run away from Indian law, he is an Interpol âWantedâ because of Indian requests and despite the sorry state of the Bofors case at present, it is not a closed book. If Quattrocchi ends up laughing his way to a Switzerland-headquartered bank, some people in official India will have to come to grief.</b>
www.indianexpress.com/ful...t_id=86037
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<b>Please join exit Q </b>
Tuesday, January 17, 2006
There are several things we donât know about the latest twist â how many have there been! â in the Bofors scandal. We donât know what was known by whom in the government and the Congress leadership, as the long arm of the law ministry reached out to give Ottavio Quattrocchi a helping hand in London. We donât know, at this point, whether Quattrocchi and his money will finally be reunited. We donât know why Quattrocchi said he has contributed to Indiaâs industrial development (figuring that one out is a challenge for economists). But we do know this â Law Minister H.R. Bhardwaj has never denied he lit the fire that may melt Quattrocchiâs bank account. And since the Supreme Court has directed that the status quo ante be restored in the matter, what option does that leave the law minister with? True, Bhardwaj saying heâs answerable to no one but the prime minister is an improvement on what Natwar Singh was saying before he was made to go. But that comparison itself damns the law minister.
More important, law ministers have to be especially sensitive to direct or implied strictures from courts, those from the highest court in particular. If they choose not to be, a crucial aspect of institutional integrity is lost. This requirement canât be masked by political-administrative manoeuvres â in this case, the CBI suddenly recalling that sending the additional solicitor general to London was absolutely, completely, its own independent, considered decision, and that no minister had anything to do with it. The best that can be said about this is that it fails even the test of amoral politics. If the idea was to deflect responsibility, it should have been done earlier, not after days of Bhardwaj defending the decision and after government leaks describing ministerial involvement.
The bad planning may be a sign of greater official discomfiture than has been admitted. If that is the case, the prime minister and Sonia Gandhi should know that feeling better wonât come from doing nothing<b>. To remind them: Ottavio Quattrocchi did run away from Indian law, he is an Interpol âWantedâ because of Indian requests and despite the sorry state of the Bofors case at present, it is not a closed book. If Quattrocchi ends up laughing his way to a Switzerland-headquartered bank, some people in official India will have to come to grief.</b>
www.indianexpress.com/ful...t_id=86037
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->