Pioneer, 27 Sept., 2007
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->ASG owns up affidavit fiasco
Nidhi Sharma | New DelhiÂ
Too late, as two ASI officials are already suspended
<b>In a confidential report submitted to Law Minister HR Bhardwaj, Additional Solicitor General Gopal Subramaniam has owned responsibility for Archaeological Survey of India's affidavit in Sethusamudram Canal Project </b>that said there is no historical or scientific evidence to establish the existence of Lord Ram.
This has added another twist to the controversy because the Government has already suspended two ASI officials for their role in filing the controversial affidavit. <b>In a related development, Culture Minister Ambika Soni on Wednesday publicly lauded the officials of the Culture Ministry, specifically ASI Director-General Anshu Vaish, who had been in the eye of a storm for her role in the filing of the affidavit.</b>
Addressing a gathering at the inauguration of Nizam's jewels exhibition at National Museum, Soni said: "You (Anshu Vaish) have come and joined on very good recommendations. I know you have a good background in archaeology."
Vaish has been asked to conduct an inquiry into the entire affidavit and how objectionable paragraphs made their way into the final draft. The Director-General has also been asked to explain her personal role in the filing of the affidavit and how the said paragraphs escaped her attention. She has asked for some more time to file her report.
According to highly placed sources, Subramaniam has submitted a confidential report to the Law Minister in which he has owned responsibility for the controversial paragraphs included in the affidavit. <b>Subramaniam has reportedly said in the report that his team had drafted the affidavit and that is why it is their mistake.</b>
This, however, leaves several questions unanswered. The biggest one remains - was the proper procedure for filing affidavits in Supreme Court followed? According to sources, Subramaniam's report says that there was a deviation from the normal procedure.
The Culture Ministry had found two scapegoats - director (administration) Chandrashekhar and assistant director (monuments) V Bakshi - and suspended them. <b>Why were these officials suspended when the fault really lay in the language of the affidavit, which was framed by the team of lawyers. </b>
Left red-faced by the controversial affidavit, which has been withdrawn now, the Government is desperately trying to tide over the crisis. The Law Ministry had promised a "mechanism" to solve the differences between various parties.
According to reliable UPA sources, a panel of about 10 experts would be announced within one week to look into the Ram Setu controversy. It would comprise archaeologists, geologists and other experts who would address the objections of the petitioners. A senior official said: "The terms of reference of the committee would be the same as directed by the Supreme Court."
The Law Minister has been roped in to coordinate between Culture and Shipping Ministries. What has made the task even trickier for the UPA Government is that while Ambika Soni is a Congress Minister, the Shipping portfolio is with DMK's TR Baalu.
Bhardwaj met Baalu to deliberate on the issue on Wednesday evening. The Government has sought three months' time to address the controversial project issue. The next hearing is likely to be slated for January 2008. Till then, the Shipping Ministry can continue dredging but cannot inch ahead on the canal project.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Shoudlnt the ASG be fired or reprimanded? And why doesn't he resign for causing so much misery and agony? I get it he is a Teflon coated Well-Off Modern Indian. So he doesnt have to take responsibility.
And why the confidential report to the Minister. He has commited a public offence why the private apology? and he was silent when the two ASI officials were supended. Let me quote an English poet to this WMI dork.
"They also are guilty who are silent in a moral crisis" Dante in Paradise Lost.
And
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Cowardly deed
The Pioneer Edit Desk
Officials punished for ASG's error
The unsavoury saga of the UPA Government first denying the existence of Lord Ram through an affidavit in the Supreme Court, thus unleashing outrage across the nation, and then hastening to deny its earlier denial through a fresh affidavit, has taken a new twist. <b>It now transpires that the perverse affidavit was drafted by Additional Solicitor-General Gopal Subramaniam and his team of lawyers; that officials of the Archaeological Survey of India did not have a role in preparing the final document; and, that the laid down procedure for preparing responses to court notices was possibly short-circuited. According to news reports, Mr Subramaniam is believed to have admitted as much in a confidential note to Union Law Minister HR Bhardwaj;</b> given the popular disquiet generated by the uncalled for affidavit, it would be in order for the Government to place the contents of the note in the public domain, if only to be seen as fixing responsibility for a gross error of judgement which could have far-reaching consequences. More important, by coming clean on this issue, <b>the Government would spare officials in the Archaeological Survey of India the burden of carrying the cross for somebody else who is higher up in the pecking order of the bureaucracy and enjoys political patronage, namely Mr Subramaniam.</b> It will be recalled that within hours of the ill-advised affidavit provoking a backlash, the Government had suspended two officials of the Archaeological Survey of India, blaming them for the mess - <b>Mr Subramaniam's admission shows the officials were made into scapegoats by a cynical regime.</b> Such cynicism does little to enhance the executive's authority and prestige; on the contrary, it makes the permanent bureaucracy scornful of the political leadership.
In this particular instance, the two suspended officials should immediately be reinstated and their service record expunged of any adverse comments that may have been entered. Not to do so would be a travesty of justice and only prove that the Government has more to hide than is known. <b>Meanwhile, the Union Government and the State Governments should seriously consider reframing rules that allow summary action against officials by politicians and their appointees too cowardly to own up their own mistakes</b>. Unless based on fairplay, punishment can have a negative impact. Witness the manner in which a Delhi school teacher was sacked from her job after a television channel broadcast a spurious story about her. Ironically, even though the channel has been held guilty of peddling untruth and the people involved have been arrested, the injustice done to the victim remains to be corrected. It is only a callous authority that is unmindful of the honour of individuals; such authority does not command respect.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->ASG owns up affidavit fiasco
Nidhi Sharma | New DelhiÂ
Too late, as two ASI officials are already suspended
<b>In a confidential report submitted to Law Minister HR Bhardwaj, Additional Solicitor General Gopal Subramaniam has owned responsibility for Archaeological Survey of India's affidavit in Sethusamudram Canal Project </b>that said there is no historical or scientific evidence to establish the existence of Lord Ram.
This has added another twist to the controversy because the Government has already suspended two ASI officials for their role in filing the controversial affidavit. <b>In a related development, Culture Minister Ambika Soni on Wednesday publicly lauded the officials of the Culture Ministry, specifically ASI Director-General Anshu Vaish, who had been in the eye of a storm for her role in the filing of the affidavit.</b>
Addressing a gathering at the inauguration of Nizam's jewels exhibition at National Museum, Soni said: "You (Anshu Vaish) have come and joined on very good recommendations. I know you have a good background in archaeology."
Vaish has been asked to conduct an inquiry into the entire affidavit and how objectionable paragraphs made their way into the final draft. The Director-General has also been asked to explain her personal role in the filing of the affidavit and how the said paragraphs escaped her attention. She has asked for some more time to file her report.
According to highly placed sources, Subramaniam has submitted a confidential report to the Law Minister in which he has owned responsibility for the controversial paragraphs included in the affidavit. <b>Subramaniam has reportedly said in the report that his team had drafted the affidavit and that is why it is their mistake.</b>
This, however, leaves several questions unanswered. The biggest one remains - was the proper procedure for filing affidavits in Supreme Court followed? According to sources, Subramaniam's report says that there was a deviation from the normal procedure.
The Culture Ministry had found two scapegoats - director (administration) Chandrashekhar and assistant director (monuments) V Bakshi - and suspended them. <b>Why were these officials suspended when the fault really lay in the language of the affidavit, which was framed by the team of lawyers. </b>
Left red-faced by the controversial affidavit, which has been withdrawn now, the Government is desperately trying to tide over the crisis. The Law Ministry had promised a "mechanism" to solve the differences between various parties.
According to reliable UPA sources, a panel of about 10 experts would be announced within one week to look into the Ram Setu controversy. It would comprise archaeologists, geologists and other experts who would address the objections of the petitioners. A senior official said: "The terms of reference of the committee would be the same as directed by the Supreme Court."
The Law Minister has been roped in to coordinate between Culture and Shipping Ministries. What has made the task even trickier for the UPA Government is that while Ambika Soni is a Congress Minister, the Shipping portfolio is with DMK's TR Baalu.
Bhardwaj met Baalu to deliberate on the issue on Wednesday evening. The Government has sought three months' time to address the controversial project issue. The next hearing is likely to be slated for January 2008. Till then, the Shipping Ministry can continue dredging but cannot inch ahead on the canal project.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Shoudlnt the ASG be fired or reprimanded? And why doesn't he resign for causing so much misery and agony? I get it he is a Teflon coated Well-Off Modern Indian. So he doesnt have to take responsibility.
And why the confidential report to the Minister. He has commited a public offence why the private apology? and he was silent when the two ASI officials were supended. Let me quote an English poet to this WMI dork.
"They also are guilty who are silent in a moral crisis" Dante in Paradise Lost.
And
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Cowardly deed
The Pioneer Edit Desk
Officials punished for ASG's error
The unsavoury saga of the UPA Government first denying the existence of Lord Ram through an affidavit in the Supreme Court, thus unleashing outrage across the nation, and then hastening to deny its earlier denial through a fresh affidavit, has taken a new twist. <b>It now transpires that the perverse affidavit was drafted by Additional Solicitor-General Gopal Subramaniam and his team of lawyers; that officials of the Archaeological Survey of India did not have a role in preparing the final document; and, that the laid down procedure for preparing responses to court notices was possibly short-circuited. According to news reports, Mr Subramaniam is believed to have admitted as much in a confidential note to Union Law Minister HR Bhardwaj;</b> given the popular disquiet generated by the uncalled for affidavit, it would be in order for the Government to place the contents of the note in the public domain, if only to be seen as fixing responsibility for a gross error of judgement which could have far-reaching consequences. More important, by coming clean on this issue, <b>the Government would spare officials in the Archaeological Survey of India the burden of carrying the cross for somebody else who is higher up in the pecking order of the bureaucracy and enjoys political patronage, namely Mr Subramaniam.</b> It will be recalled that within hours of the ill-advised affidavit provoking a backlash, the Government had suspended two officials of the Archaeological Survey of India, blaming them for the mess - <b>Mr Subramaniam's admission shows the officials were made into scapegoats by a cynical regime.</b> Such cynicism does little to enhance the executive's authority and prestige; on the contrary, it makes the permanent bureaucracy scornful of the political leadership.
In this particular instance, the two suspended officials should immediately be reinstated and their service record expunged of any adverse comments that may have been entered. Not to do so would be a travesty of justice and only prove that the Government has more to hide than is known. <b>Meanwhile, the Union Government and the State Governments should seriously consider reframing rules that allow summary action against officials by politicians and their appointees too cowardly to own up their own mistakes</b>. Unless based on fairplay, punishment can have a negative impact. Witness the manner in which a Delhi school teacher was sacked from her job after a television channel broadcast a spurious story about her. Ironically, even though the channel has been held guilty of peddling untruth and the people involved have been arrested, the injustice done to the victim remains to be corrected. It is only a callous authority that is unmindful of the honour of individuals; such authority does not command respect.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->