12
THE RULE OF LAW
As no tangible steps were taken to cancel the arbitrary decisions of the previous Government, the letter No. 43 was sent on 13 November 2004.The letter gave importance to rule of law. The letter follows.
From
V.SABARIMUTHU
Thattankonam
Vellicode
Mulagumoodu 629167
To
Dr. A.P.J. Abdul Kalam
His Excellency the President of India
Presidential Palace
New Delhi
Your Excellency
Kindly consider the reasons why the Constitution of India would solve most of the problems of the 1000 million people.
1. A five-judge Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court on 5 November 2004 held that the Governor of a State could independently accord sanction for prosecution provided there is a prima facie case. This judgment must be read and interpreted in the light of the 42 letters sent to His Excellency the President of India. Now, the investigating agencies could no longer plead that they have no powers to proceed, in good faith; against anyone provided there is a prima facie case. The judgment shows that “even the absolute Government should be subject to the law of the Nation”.
2. The HPCL/BPCL judgment also is a good judgment because the secondary consequences of the judgment are good. The Government is duty bound to take back the privatized PSUs based on the judgment. The procrastination undermines rule of law.
3. The petrol pump judgment was described as a “False and Wicked” judgment because its secondary consequences were bad. In that case, the learned judges played their part and left the rest to the Government. The Government, instead of devising a better guideline, divested the Members of Parliament (MPs) of their privilege and permitted less than ten industrialists to distribute thousands of petrol pumps all over India. Ironically, an MP – Mr. Anil Ambani, who is an MP now - is now granting permission for petrol outlets and the entire rest - including the ministers - is forced to bow before him to get one or two petrol outlets! Alternatively, a citizen of India from the North-East is forced to pay about Re.30 lakh to a citizen of India from the North-West to get a petrol outlet! Thus, the Court and the Government “forbid activities which are not dangerous to the peace”. What would our boys do? Is this the meaning of reform, privatization, globalization, deregulation and liberalization? Is this the way to generate wealth? The judgment- presumably - was the result of a conspiracy hatched by the Universe to tarnish the image of the judiciary and to generate the present judgment. Now, the Government could cancel forthwith all petrol outlets sanctioned since that judgment and put in place a new system. Alternatively, as huge transactions take place in petroleum business, anyone could be allowed to trade in this business subject to safety standards alone after recovering the money cornered by the industrialists.
4. A five-judge Bench again on 5 November 2004 ruled against quota within quota in the matter of employment. One would think that the Constitution is not equitable in this matter. In this connection, it must be noted that though the Supreme Court declared the fixation of district-wise quota on the ratio of district population to the total population of the State as discriminatory (P.Rajendran v.Madras, AIR 1971 SC 2303), in the Chandhala Case, the University-wise allocation of seats for admission to Medical Colleges in the State of Kerala was held to be valid(1.D.N. Chanchala v.Mysore, AIR 1971 SC 1762 and 2.Ajay Kumar v.State of Bihar, JT (1994)3SC 662 holding reservation in Medical Colleges valid). Therefore, the Union Cabinet could make the fixation of state wise quota on the ratio of state population to total population possible through legislation for public employment and for admission into the IITs. However, everything depends on the mind of the Union Cabinet.
5. State wise quota for selling the shares of the PSUs also is possible. In this connection, it must be acknowledged that Indians have an instinct for gambling. Some people relish share ownership. Some people want diverse investment opportunities. Therefore, there could be a vibrant Stock Exchange in every State. The shares of the PSUs could be reserved for the people of various States in an equitable way to prevent flight of capital and accumulation of unlimited wealth through manipulation. If the Government could think of reserving the shares of the PSUs for the NRIs, IPOs and workers, the same could be reserved for various states for the unity and integrity of the Nation present in the Constitution. This would save the PSUs from the onslaught of the industrialists thereby contributing to the unity of the Nation.
6. When this writer clubbed the sale of the VSNL with the Re. 845 crore deal of Bank of India (BoI), Mr. A.B. Vajpayee, former Prime Minister of India, described this writer as a “demon”. Naturally, he was startled by the allegation. However, this allegation enabled him to escape from for greater manipulations. Thus, the bids for selling the SCI were received on 15 April and 7 May 2004. The sale did not materialize presumably because he did not permit the banks to pay for buying the SCI. All other PSUs like Nalco also might have escaped privatization due to similar reasons. Further, the RBI Governor was asked to quit office and later he was given a seat in the Upper House only. The portfolio of the Finance Minister was also changed. These changes apparently indicated that the money from the BoI went into the hands of the industrialists without the prior knowledge of Mr. Vajpayee. On the other hand, the decision for selling the VSNL was taken, apparently, in his absence. As the Supreme Court has now demanded rule of law consistent with letter No.42 dated 28-10-2004, the responsibility for the above conversion of public property into private property using public funds could be fixed by the new Government through the aid of investigating agencies.
7. Apparently, Dr Manmohan Singh, Prime Minister of India, enabled the same industrialist to utilize the deposits in the banks and the LIC not as loan but in the name of buying shares. The people suspect that the file for releasing the money might have originated from the industrialists. Tomorrow an industrialist with ten bank branches or an industrialist with a compound wall for a plant would come out with a public issue, and someone in power would direct the banks and the LIC to release money. Therefore, in this matter also the responsibility for the flight of capital should be fixed without delay to prove the point that there is rule of law. It is very vital for the Nation. Even otherwise, it is said that the concern of political thought is nothing less than the moral phenomena of human behaviour in society.
8. One would tell that the fate of the “cash rich enterprises” should not be utilized to annoy the present Government. It is very vital for rule of law because the Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) was silent in this matter. It is said that every political problem demands immediate pragmatic and practical investigation mainly to prevent its recurrence.
9. All the letters contribute to rule of law in one-way or other. The moment there is rule of law the donor-acceptor relationship between citizen, and citizen would tend to disappear and everyone in India would struggle to remain with the Indian Union with FRATERNITY. Further, the moment there is rule of law; all the manipulations would come to light. The rule of law, according to Hobbes (1588-1679) “consists in certain rules, as doth arithmetic and geometry; not, as tennis-play, on practice only: which rules, neither poor men have had the leisure, nor men that have had the leisure hitherto had the curiosity, or the method to find out”.
10. This is letter No.43. The system, that includes the National Human Rights Commission, forbids even this limited knowledge, which is not at all dangerous to peace. However, the new Government is now taking some sincere steps hitherto unknown to Indians to solve militancy. There is a feeling that the Government is breeding militancy and the military in some parts of India is “forcing men to obey a de facto sovereign power. But they have no moral obligation-according to Hobbes- to do so in the sense that they have a moral obligation to obey the Government that they have authorized to act for them”. Therefore, only the Constitution and therefore the rule of law would easily solve the problem with the militant people and other inequalities that breed militancy. However, everything depends on the mind of the Union Cabinet.
Vellicode Yours faithfully,
13-11-2004
(V.SABARIMUTHU)
The New Indian Express in one of the corners of its paper on 14 November 2004 reported that the Prime Minister’s Office (PMO) -in one of the circulars- asked the bureaucrats to keep away from the agents of business houses.
Dr. Manmohan Singh, on 14 November 2004, said that the time was ripe to heal the wounds of the Kashmiris who had suffered a great deal due to militancy during the past decade. He expressed his hope that his impending visit to Jammu and Kashmir would start a new chapter of peace. While the Prime Minister said this at Hyderabad, militant people gunned down three policemen in Jammu and Kashmir.
Dr. A.P.J. Abdul Kalam, on 14 November 2004, said that Competitiveness was the key to the transformation of India. Perhaps the President was echoing the paragraph No.8 of the letter No.42 dated 28-11-2004. He, further, said that the dream of the children was to build a new India, prosperous, happy and safe. In order to make this dream a reality he said that the citizens must have certain unique qualities. Quoting from the Tamil poet, Thiruvalluvar, he said that successful leaders could never be defeated by problems. They would become masters of the situation and defeat the problem. He added that during his meeting with Mr. Nelson Mandela at South Africa he learnt two lessons from him. Those two lessons were his “indomitable spirit and the virtue of forgiveness. He finally quoted one couplet from Thirukkural, which said, “Those who have done evil to you, the best humiliation for them is to heap good deeds on them”.
In the meantime Mr. Ragul Gandhi M.P. undertook a private visit to the North-East. He mingled with the IITans and other people. He said that he appreciated the problems of the people.
On 15 November 2004, there were reports that Tata was inching closer to acquiring South Africa’s Second Network Operator.
On 16 November 2004, a Public Interest Litigation petition was filed in the Supreme Court seeking a direction to the Union Government to notify the Freedom of Information Act, 2002 passed by both houses of Parliament. The Act received the assent of the President on January 6, 2003. The petition was filed by a Mr. Sanjay Goel. The petitioner said that as per Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, everyone had every right to receive and impart information and the ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers. The petitioner said that free flow of information was necessary for stable governance.
Ms. Indira Goswami, Jnanpith Award winner from Assam, met Dr.Manmohan on 16 November 2004 at New Delhi. She said that United Liberation Front of Assam (ULFA) leaders would come for talks only if “sovereignty” was the core subject on the agenda.
The Union Rural Development Minister, Mr. Raghuvansh Prasad Singh, on 16 November 2004, said that the economic policies of the Centre favoured the rich and discriminated against the poor. He added that the Finance Ministry had no clue on how to draft the policies, the basic principle of which should be to hike the prices of luxury items and reduce the prices of products used by the poor.
During his visit to Jammu and Kashmir, Dr. Manmohan, on 17 November 2004, promised a “new beginning” for Jammu and Kashmir. He expressed his willingness to talk with all those who abjure violence, promised “peace with dignity”, agreed to lift the ban on job recruitment and announced Re.24,000 crore for the economic revival of the state.
Two militants were killed when they opened fire at a search party of security forces near the stadium where Dr. Manmohan Singh was to address a rally. The incident occurred just before his arrival.
Inaugurating the two-day Economic Editors Conference, Mr. P. Chithambaram, Finance Minister, on 17 November 2004 said that the Government was committed to strengthening, broadening and deepening reforms but added that he was absorbing all views and ideas. At the outset he said that the views of the Economic Editors- at times - become the view of the Government. The words were reminiscent of the bank amalgamation proposal by the Finance Minister and later by the Prime Minister a few months ago.
“The New Indian Express”, on 18 November 2004, wrote an editorial on the Prime Minister’s visit to Kashmir. The subtitle of the editorial was “It will demand great staying power”. The paper was indirectly requesting the Prime Minister not to relinquish power.
The Supreme Court on 19 November 2004 cancelled the allotment of a plot to the former High Court judge, Justice B.P.Banerjee, by the then Chief Minister of West Bengal, Mr. Jyoti Basu, from his discretionary quota. The judges-Justice S.N.Variava and Justice H.K.Sema – observed that Justice B. P. Banerjee misused his divine judicial duty to accomplish his personal ends and betrayed the trust reposed in him by the people. The judgment said that it was high time that the judiciary took outmost care to see the temple of justice did not crack from inside. The Court said that there was an unholy nexus between the passing of the judicial order and granting order of allotment.
No comments:
Post a Comment