Exit Mr Tohra
THE inevitable has happened. After threatening to resign a number of times Mr Gurcharan Singh Tohra has finally quit as the President of the SGPC — the highest Sikh temporal body.

Spare the judiciary
THE frequent recourse to ordering a judicial enquiry is like reckless administration of broad spectrum drugs by doctors to cover their incompetence in the matter of diagnosing and treatment of ailments.

Not just a murder
DELHI is truly becoming the crime capital of the world and the situation has already reached a stage where 10 murders do not make many lose their sleep. Certainly not the law-enforcing agencies which are meant to make life safe for the common man.

A YEAR OF VAJPAYEE GOVT
by Inder Malhotra
IT was wily Harold Wilson of Britain who first tumbled to the truth that a week is a “long time in politics”. By this reckoning a year must be considered eternity, a thought that must cheer Mr Atal Behari Vajpayee and his friends on his completion of 12 months in power.

Australia: populate or perish
by S. P. Seth
IN the late eighties when Mr John Howard, as opposition leader, advocated a curb on Asian immigration to maintain Australia’s social cohesion (a euphemism of keeping Australia White), he was widely criticised by the political and intellectual establishment.

Telecom scam: stuck on a technical ground
NEW DELHI: Former Union Telecommunications Minister Sukh Ram has thrown a spanner in the prosecution’s works by contesting in the Delhi High Court the two cases slapped on him by the C.B.I. in 1997 — the Rs 1.68-crore telecom scam and the disproportionate assets case.

Accountants & accountability
by Anurag
CAREER accountants are revered (or reviled?) as the keepers of financial conscience of the organisation they work for. Or so they claim. In a rule-ridden and procedure-cum- precedent-philic government department, they act as financial advisers with de-facto veto powers. That their altruistic advice sometimes makes for more mirth than meaning is a different matter. But anyone who can give you a few hilarious moments, that too at his own expense, inside a dull and drab sarkari sanctum sanctorum must be heartily hailed, if only for his own sake! Amen.

75 Years Ago

Indian system of book-keeping
THE following letter has been sent to the Registrar of Panjab University by Mr R.K. Kumar, M.A., Principal, Commercial College, Delhi:- I have the honour to request the favour of your kindly considering the possibility of introducing Sarrafi (Indian system of book-keeping) and elements of economics as alternative subjects with Geometry and Geography in the Matriculation Examination courses of your university. The Sarrafi system of keeping accounts is quite as efficient as the system of book-keeping by double entry.

Exit Mr Tohra

THE inevitable has happened. After threatening to resign a number of times Mr Gurcharan Singh Tohra has finally quit as the President of the SGPC — the highest Sikh temporal body. His resignation has come following his open confrontation with Mr Parkash Singh Badal who holds dual charge as Chief Minister and President of the Shiromani Akali Dal (SAD). Differences between the two may not be fundamental but their battle of words has certainly vitiated Punjab's politico-religious environment, specially during the present historic occasion of the Khalsa tercentenary. The best course for them would have been mutual adjustment and reconciliation. But this became nearly impossible as several issues and non-issues acquired emotional overtones and got entangled with their personal egos. This was clear from their public utterances at Anandpur Sahib and other places. The die had been cast. A formal split is now a formality. Indeed, when the politics of confrontation sets the pace of public life, the questions of right and wrong, of propriety and impropriety and of values and morals get submerged. So, any judgement on individuals' roles in the Akali crisis has to wait.

It is a historical fact that the Akalis tend to split whenever they capture power. In the present Tohra-Badal feud, a number of political and religious issues have got mixed up. The problem with the SAD is that it has not been able to draw a Lakshman rekha between political affairs and religious issues. This tendency naturally complicates even simple matters of governance and the Panthic maryada. It is a pity that even Akal Takht has got dragged into the Badal-Tohra controversy. Mr Tohra has, of course, tried to rationalise his conduct in his resignation letter addressed to all members of the SGPC. He claims that his decision to quit was as much prompted by the desire to "save" the honour and dignity of Akal Takht as to save each "one" from being a "traitor" to the Panth and Akal Takht. This is a rather tall claim. Mr Tohra and his associates are as much guilty of certain aberrations as is the Badal camp. What is most disquieting in the entire episode is the fallout of the politico-religious controversy on the Sikh masses. One can see a crisis of confidence among them, and if Mr Tohra intensifies his confrontationist campaign, the problems in the state are bound to get complicated and complex. Much will depend on how Mr Badal and his supporters tackle the challenge posed by Mr Tohra and his group. The need of the hour is not a hysterical response but a sober approach to the various issues thrown up by the confrontation.

Both Mr Badal and Mr Tohra owe it to the Panth and the state that peace and harmony are ensured. As it is, Punjab has lost in the current battle between the two leaders. In fact, the Chief Minister has a special responsibility to see to it that the atmosphere of animosity does not hamper his legitimate political responsibility both as SAD President and Chief Minister. It will be worthwhile for him to look at some of the points raised by Mr Tohra and address the vital question of improving the performance of his government. He has got a golden opportunity to put Punjab in the forefront in growth and progress. And, as we have said a number of times, history will judge him by his success in tackling the serious problems of infrastructure, agriculture and industry in the state. It is a pity that his attention has been distracted by his feud with Mr Tohra. He owes it to the people that correctives are applied and he gets on with the job of galvanising the development process with the sole aim of making Punjab India's number one state.

Spare the judiciary

THE frequent recourse to ordering a judicial enquiry is like reckless administration of broad spectrum drugs by doctors to cover their incompetence in the matter of diagnosing and treatment of ailments. Going by the predictable response of virtually the entire political class to unexpected developments it may not be wrong to say that the country should either be handed over to the Central Bureau of Investigation or the judiciary should be converted into a permanent commission of enquiry by replacing existing institutions for administration and investigation. How else should one respond to the announcement by Union Home Minister LK Advani in the Lok Sabha that a judicial enquiry has been ordered into Sunday’s devastating fire in a jhuggi-jhonpri cluster in Delhi? There would be no need to question the government for setting up as many commissions of enquiry as it deems necessary for “enquiring” into the causes of major or minor incidents but for the fact that it is the hard earned money of the tax-payers which is wasted on such futile exercises. What can a judicial enquiry unravel which is not already known about jhuggi-jhonpri clusters anywhere in the country? The Centre and the Government of Delhi will have to be very clear whether they want a permanent solution or a please-all solution to the problem. A permanent solution would appear heartless because it would involve the removal of all illegal tenements on government land because they are a primary source of social and communal tension; because they breed crimes and criminals; because they are an unwanted burden on the already inadequate civic amenities in the National Capital. However, such a solution was possible when the first illegal jhuggi came up in Delhi at least five decades ago.

Today any attempt to remove the several lakh jhuggi-dwellers would cause a massive political and social explosion which may even shake the very foundations of civil society. But a judicial enquiry which Mr Advani announced with great fanfare in the Lok Sabha cannot throw any new light on the issue. What Delhi needs is a close second look at its outdated master plan. And this task can be better accomplished by competent town planners than by a sitting Judge of the Delhi High Court. There should be no doubt whatsoever that the Commission of Inquiry Act has failed to serve the purpose for which it was enacted. Can anyone explain the purpose which the Thakkar Commission served or for that matter the Kudal Commission, the Madon Commission, the Kuldip Singh Commission, the Misra Commission or the two-member Thakkar-Natarajan Commission. Most elected representatives of the people may not even remember the reason why these commissions were set up. Among other things the Thakkar-Natarajan Commission in its report on the Fairfax scandal said that “no self-respecting judge of the Supreme Court or any High Court should accept to hold a Commission of Inquiry in future if... the Act is not suitably modified to include the provisions of contempt of court”. It further stated that the commission members were subjected to “wanton and deliberate character assassination” by a section of the media. Justice B.N. Srikrishna of the Bombay High Court who prepared the report on the post-Babri Masjid serial blasts in the city would testify that the political class can be equally nasty in tearing to pieces the character of the presiding officer. Why do sitting Judges accept such assignments and thereafter join the group of disillusioned presiding officers snubbed by the political leadership?

Not just a murder

DELHI is truly becoming the crime capital of the world and the situation has already reached a stage where 10 murders do not make many lose their sleep. Certainly not the law-enforcing agencies which are meant to make life safe for the common man. In such a situation, it is meaningless to focus on any particular killing. But the recent murder of Irfan Hussain was not just another dot on the ever-rising crime graph of the national Capital. That would have been true only if he were killed for his money alone or for some personal reasons. But this young man in all probability died for lampooning some edgy leaders through his cartoons. This belief is strengthened by similar threats issued to cartoonists of several other newspapers, allegedly at the behest of a political party which happens to be a partner of the ruling coalition. If that indeed is the motive behind the heinous crime, it takes intolerance to a new height. There are many journalists who have paid with their lives for exposing the skeletons in the cupboards of various powerful people. But at least the cartoonists were not targeted like this in the past. At worst, they were threatened but murder…! The very thought is revolting. It is futile to recall the good old days but there indeed was a time not too long ago when those who were the target of the cartoonists’ pen were the greatest admirers of the artists. “Don’t spare me please, Shankar” was the refrain of some of the top leaders of the country to one of the best-known cartoonists of his time. From that era to today, when a cartoonist is brutally murdered, it is a steep downhill journey into fascism. Surprisingly, Hussain never went overboard in targeting any person or party. And even if he did so, for argument’s sake, his being butchered like this for his “crime” is unthinkable. As it is, journalists work under trying conditions. This kind of sword hanging on their head may not deter their investigative pursuit but would surely be an attack on the freedom of the Press.

What makes the situation all the more alarming is that certain political parties are backing the criminals and thus ensuring protection for them. Surprisingly, even the police is yet to fully realise the gravity of the situation, let alone set it right. What nobody seems to appreciate is that every crime which remains unsolved encourages the perpetrators even further. The police is still in the dark about the earlier killings of Shivani Jajodia, an assistant producer with New Delhi Television, and Shivani Bhatnagar, a special correspondent with The Indian Express. As said earlier, threats have already been issued to two other cartoonists of the Capital. Things are no better in the rest of the country. These totalitarian tendencies need to be nipped right away in the larger interest of society.

A YEAR OF VAJPAYEE GOVT
Survival alone isn’t enough
by Inder Malhotra

IT was wily Harold Wilson of Britain who first tumbled to the truth that a week is a “long time in politics”. By this reckoning a year must be considered eternity, a thought that must cheer Mr Atal Behari Vajpayee and his friends on his completion of 12 months in power. This “feat” becomes all the more remarkable for another important reason.

No government at the Centre during the decade since the end of the eighties — with the solitary and conspicuous exception of that headed by Mr Narasimha Rao — has ever completed 365 days in office. Despite the enormous goodwill with which he had ascended to the prime ministerial chair, Mr V.P. Singh fell in 11 months flat. His successor, Mr Chandra Shekhar, didn’t last even 120 days.

To be sure, Mr Narasimha Rao did stabilise his minority government for full five years. But the methods he used for this purpose are now being exposed in courts of law and the resultant stench offends the nostrils. Mr Vajpayee’s first government in 1996 will always be remembered as a 13-day wonder. Mr H.D. Deve Gowda’s was sent packing within nine months; that of Mr Inder Kumar Gujral in seven.

Against this backdrop Atalji’s success in keeping together a raucously fractious coalition, rendered all the more fragile by dissensions within the Sangh Parivar, for a whole year is by itself a major achievement. But the key question is whether survival, by itself, is enough. Especially at a time when the country remains mired in a morass of multi-dimensional crisis the most painful feature of which is lack of confidence in, and credibility of, the government’s ability to govern effectively and fairly.

What has gone wrong is best illustrated perhaps by the fate of arguably the best thing the Vajpayee government has done so far, indeed during the first two months after taking over the country’s reins: the Shakti series of nuclear tests in May last which were inevitably followed by the Pakistani blasts at Chagai, converting South Asia’s covert nuclearisation into an overt one.

Never mind the screams and tears of those who are totally opposed to Indian nuclear weapons while happy to live with the awesome nuclear arsenals, now made perpetual, of the five nuclear hegemons. For the sake of Indian security, Pokhran-II was not only necessary but also overdue. Otherwise the pretence of keeping alive the nuclear option without exercising it would have been reduced to total absurdity, and the country would have had to bid farewell to a minimum but credible nuclear deterrent.

The Prime Minister and his close advisers were therefore right boldly to take the plunge on May 11, 1998. Sadly, however, they went about the job so clumsily as to rob the great achievement of much of its glory. The occasion called for rallying the entire nation behind the historic landmark. Instead, the Hindutva extremists and other zealots of the saffron camp were allowed to claim all the credit for themselves and embark on the most unbecoming and jingoistic flexing of the nuclear muscle. No wonder, domestic political discord at a high enough pitch already was aggravated dangerously. Even those who had played a role in developing this country’s nuclear weapons were provoked into denouncing the tests. That this amounted to putting partisan pique above national interest seemed to bother no one.

No less shocking than this apparently wilful destruction of national consensus was the stark absence of any diplomatic offensive in support of the Indian nuclear programme and to find a meeting ground with the international community between the needs of Indian security and the goals of nuclear nonproliferation and eventual elimination of nuclear weapons. Evidently, no home work was ever done.

Belated attempts at damage control have doubtless produced results. The nuclear dialogue with the USA has not yet led to a mutually satisfactory understanding. But promising progress has been made. The dialogue with Pakistan, which is of overriding importance, has been given a tremendous boost by the “bus diplomacy” and now covers nuclear confidence building measures regardless of what happens over other issues between the two neighbours.

This, combined with a Budget that had elements pleasing various sections of the people, should normally have ended the BJP-led coalition’s first year in power on a happy note. But, unfortunately, that was not to be. The government’s Bihar fiasco, now underlined by the hasty retreat from the Patna Raj Bhavan of the controversial Governor, Mr Sunder Singh Bhandari, has cast a very dark shadow on the government’s annual balance sheet.

In fact, the Bihar disaster, like the maladroit handling of the all-important nuclear tests, turns the spotlight on the ruling coalition’s cardinal sin: a seemingly irremediable proclivity to act in indecent haste and then rue at leisure. The attempt to impose President’s rule in Bihar was wrong, morally and politically, from the word go. To go ahead with it, without being sure of the mandatory support in the Rajya Sabha, was an act of crass folly.

The crowning irony, however, is that the reckless move in Bihar is not the only one which the Vajpayee government has had to withdraw in humiliating circumstances. The tragedy is that some of the wisest and most necessary decisions that Mr Vajpayee took — such as reduction of profligate subsidies, rise in petroleum prices or phone tariffs — and so on — have also been rescinded almost immediately. To nobody’s surprise, this has earned the ruling dispensation the unflattering nickname — a “roll-back government”.

It is no good for any apologist of the government to argue that these are “compulsions” of coalition politics. The art or science of statecraft, to say nothing of demands of leadership, requires that a consensus within the coalition be evolved first and the policy formulated only later. To reverse the process by acting first and retreating under pressure, often from a small partner in the governing combination, makes no sense at all.

Were this all, things would have been depressing enough. They have been made even more troubling because the BJP is no longer in a position to boast —as it could do until about three months ago with some justification — that nobody had accused it of corruption and malfeasanee. On both counts now the government is under attack.

The dismissal of the former Chief of Naval Staff, Admiral Vishnu Bhagwat, on the penultimate day of the last year, unprecedented in the annals of our armed forces since Independence, has shown the government, especially the Defence Minister, in very poor light. If there are sound reasons to have removed the Admiral, the country has yet to hear them. To insinuate that the government’s reticence has something to do with national security does not wash. If the former CNS has violated national security he must be courtmartialled. To Parliament and the people, the government must come clean. Its unwillingness to do so is underscored by the mess over the formation of an informal committee of the two Houses to decide whether the issue should be discussed in the open House and if so within what parameters.

It is in this context that the former Navy Chief’s serious charges of corruption against Mr George Fernandes have to be viewed and answered. Equally serious are the charges levelled by Mr Mohan Guruswamy, the BJP’s own appointee as adviser to the Finance Minister who was sacked as summarily as he was appointed abruptly. His allegations are not confined to Mr Yashwant Sinha. They are directed also at the PMO and the Prime Minister’s son-in-law.

One more rather pertinent point needs to be made. Those trying to control the government from behind the scene must realise that there is greater goodwill for Mr Vajpayee than for the collectivity called the ruling coalition. The Prime Minister ought to do more to build on this foundation than he has done so far.

Australia: populate or perish
by S. P. Seth

IN the late eighties when Mr John Howard, as opposition leader, advocated a curb on Asian immigration to maintain Australia’s social cohesion (a euphemism of keeping Australia White), he was widely criticised by the political and intellectual establishment. He later regretted his remarks to repair the electoral damage it caused with the Asian settlers in Australia. However, after becoming Prime Minister in 1996, his government wasted no time to restrict immigration numbers, effectively curbing migrant inflow from Asia as a major source.

Mr Howard seemed to be competing with Ms Pauline Hanson (the apostle of White supremacy) for who the whitest of all was. In process, he coopted much of Ms Hanson’s race agenda and put it into practice. Which would explain, among other things, the relative eclipse of Ms Hanson and her One Nation Party.

This brief background is necessary to put in perspective the recent effort by the opposition Labour Party to push the case for a higher intake of immigrants into the country. As the Labour Party’s immigration spokesman said in February, “Now they (the Hansonites) are on the way down and we are two-and-half-year out from an election, let’s have the debate” on immigration. In other words, it is relatively safe politically.

Indeed, the Labour Party has a very vocal and powerful supporter in Mr Jeff Kennett, Victoria’s premier from Mr John Howard’s Liberal Party. According to Mr Kennett, “The country needs people — without people we have no county... we are now currently allowing 60,000 a year into the country — that is ridiculously low.”

Mr Kim Beazley, the Labour Party opposition leader, is being cautious by advocating the adoption of a five -year population policy (still to be unfolded) without committing himself to any specific number. He is, therefore, testing the political waters, while supporting the broad thrust of his immigration spokesman on the need for increased immigration. It would seem that he is leaving the room open for a political backflip, if the debate were to assume racist overtones with Asians inevitably to figure as prospective migrants.

Mr Beazley has already signalled a change in favour of skilled migrants over family reunion. While in government, the Labour Party had supported family reunion. Under this, migrants already settled in Australia could sponsor their parents and other blood relatives to join them in Australia; though the Labour government later tightened the rules to control the numbers.

Under Mr John Howard’s government, family reunion is almost a dirty word and a bad policy — with all sorts of restrictions to curb it. Mr Beazley still takes a relatively compassionate view of family reunion. According to him, “The fact of the matter is if you invite people into this country and you won’t let in mum and dad you have got to pause for thought... otherwise you just create a bunch of depressed new Australians.”

The obvious question (leaving aside the immigration categories) is: why is this sudden interest in increased immigration into Australia? The receding of open racism, as espoused by Ms Pauline Hanson and her ilk, is an important factor pointed out by the Labour’s immigration spokesman. It is, therefore, possible now to talk rationally on the subject.

For instance, the compelling economic argument that without a large internal market Australia’s economic future will not be all that bright, seems to make sense. Without a growing internal market of its own, Australia will always be subject to the vagaries of external markets for the export of its primary and mineral products. Not surprisingly, the Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry is among the most vocal supporters of increased immigration.

Another important imperative is the need for more working age people to support Australia’s growing ageing population. Australia’s natural growth rate is not enough to replace the loss. Increased immigration, therefore, is the only alternative. As Ms Beazley has put it, “We cannot afford a situation where fewer and fewer people are supporting more and more in retirement or out of the workforce (unemployed), it won’t work.”

Australia also needs more people to repopulate its regional and remote areas. Australians (including migrants) tend to flock to coastal cities like Sydney, Melbourne, Brisbane and Perth. The rural and regional Australia is emptying fast. The state of Tasmania (remote as it is) is losing people to the mainland, and its economic base is contracting. Increased immigration could be targeted to populate these regions with suitable incentives for new arrivals.

But the proponents of increased population might soon find themselves on the defensive, as the purveyors of racial hate find a new ammunition to ignite old prejudices. Prime Minister John Howard is quite happy with the present reduced immigration intake based on high skills and business acumen.

While there is a very strong case for a larger population for Australia (which inevitably means greater immigration), the Labour Party’s advocacy of it might not endear it to the electorate. The majority tends to believe that for racial and economic reasons (immigrants allegedly take away local jobs and cost the exchequer in terms of support and services) Australia shouldn’t take more migrants — even though there is ample evidence to suggest that immigrants have greatly enriched the country economically and culturally. But that is a different story.

Accountants & accountability
by Anurag

CAREER accountants are revered (or reviled?) as the keepers of financial conscience of the organisation they work for. Or so they claim. In a rule-ridden and procedure-cum-precedent-philic government department, they act as financial advisers with de-facto veto powers. That their altruistic advice sometimes makes for more mirth than meaning is a different matter.

But anyone who can give you a few hilarious moments, that too at his own expense, inside a dull and drab sarkari sanctum sanctorum must be heartily hailed, if only for his own sake! Amen.

I am not going to recount that infamous story about the purchase of snow-scooters which eluded our jawans perched atop the Siachen glacier for years on end until the minister himself made it plain to the mandarins that he meant serious business and, by George, sent them about their business!

My experience with my accounts pals has been, rather down-to-earth, more mundane than mountainous. A fresh recruit in my office had applied for a loan worth a few thousand rupees, as per his entitlement, for his marriage, still a month away. I routinely, though promptly, forwarded the papers, the wedding card in tow, to the accounts officer who, I thought, would pass appropriate orders and be done with it. But that was not to be. Two weeks hence, the self-same file landed on my table. The stately section officer had roundly recorded:

How was the work being managed so far ?

What will be the expected rate of return?

To his credit, the section officer was double-quick to make amends and apologise.

Another instance of investment proposals being subjected to critical scrutiny is no less comical. A double storeyed control office building was to be constructed on top priority. The seasoned accounts officer called for a statement of cost of construction of the ground floor and the first floor. “The latter being much less than the former, only the first floor should be constructed”, minuted the conscientious objector.

None other than a genius or a lunatic could have accepted this challenge which defied the immutable laws of nature. Amusement apart, these are costly and cruel jokes, which make accountability a casualty.

Telecom scam: stuck on a technical ground

NEW DELHI: Former Union Telecommunications Minister Sukh Ram has thrown a spanner in the prosecution’s works by contesting in the Delhi High Court the two cases slapped on him by the C.B.I. in 1997 — the Rs 1.68-crore telecom scam and the disproportionate assets case.

The telecom scam which had stunned the nation was unearthed by the CBI on August 8,1996, as a major swoop against what is known as corruption in high places. After registering a formal F.I.R. the C.B.I. conducted simultaneous raids on Mr Sukh Ram’s houses in Delhi and Mandi (in Himachal Pradesh) and the Delhi house of Ms Runu Ghosh, one of the directors in his ministry on August 16.

During a search of Mr Sukh Ram’s Delhi residence (12, Safdarjung Road) a team of 30-odd CBI sleuths unearthed trunks and suitcases full of hard cash, most of them concealed in the former minister’s puja room. The money seemed to have been left untouched till then as many bundles bore slips indicating the banks they had come from — ANZ Grindlays, State Bank of India, United Commercial Bank, among others. Also indicated were the dates of withdrawal which helped the CBI in tracing the identity of the donors. The CBI also seized a large quantity of jewellery, along with diaries and incriminating papers.

The raids on Mr Sukh Ram’s Delhi and Mandi houses reportedly yielded a total haul of Rs. 3.60 crore.

This was described as the biggest-ever seizure in cash in the history of any investigating agency from the residential premises of a politician.

When the raids were conducted Mr Sukh Ram was not in the country. Accompanied by his wife, he had gone to London for a medical checkup. His younger daughter, Mrs Ritu Sharma, who was present in the Delhi house, was unable to explain anything about the money. No family member was present at Mandi either. His son, Mr Anil Kumar, then a minister in the Himachal Pradesh government, had left for Kulu.

As for the raid on the house of Ms Runu Ghosh, the C.B.I. claimed to have seized 20 gold Rolex watches, over Rs 1.32 lakh in cash, over Rs 1 lakh in foreign currency and gold.

After completing the searches and seizures the investigating agency was at its wits’ end how to track down the former minister in London. It sent a message to Indian High Commission officials asking them to inform Mr Sukh Ram that he was immediately wanted for questioning. They contacted his daughter who informed them that her father had left for New York on August 12, 1996. The High Commission was given to understand that he was on his way to Houston, where he had a bypass operation in 1995, for a medical checkup. The High Commission officials failed, however, to trace him in the USA.

It was only on August 23,1996, that Mr Sukh Ram’s son-in-law phoned the High Commission to reveal that his father-in-law had returned to Britain three days ago. He told the High Commission that Mr Sukh Ram was not well but had every intention of returning to India. It was only in the first week of September that Mr Sukh Ram broke his silence and spelt out his plan to return to India. But it was actually on September 16,1996, that he landed here only to be arrested and interrogated by the C.B.I.

On being asked by Outlook about the assets recovered from his houses, Mr Sukh Ram had retorted: “Just wait and I will show the world that they were party funds.” This remark of the former minister had rattled the party high command and ultimately led to his ouster from the Congress.

And when Ms Runu Ghosh was interviewed by Outlook about the allegation of corruption against her, she maintained that she did nothing wrong. As for the watches and jewellery, she explained that she bought all that from abroad. She denied that she had any other moveable and immovable assets. “I have none. Now it is up to the C.B.I. to find out.”

How was the alleged scandal unearthed? It was purely professional heart-burning within the Department of Telecommunications over the rapid rise of Deputy Director-General (Finance) Runu Ghosh, Mr Sukh Ram’s favourite bureaucrat. Some of her colleagues, outraged at her success and high-handedness, sent anonymous petitions to the C.B.I. levelling all sorts of allegations. The agency started discreet investigation about a month before actually slapping the criminal case on both of them.

After completing the investigation, the CBI filed challans in the court of Delhi Special Judge, Mr Ajit Bhairhoke, in 1997. The Judge framed charges against Mr Sukh Ram and Ms Runu Ghosh on September 8, 1998. The Judge had hardly recorded statements of two prosecution witnesses — Mr K. Nagaranjan, Assistant Director General (Vigilance) of the Telecom Department, and Mr V.K. Malhotra, Joint Secretary in the Union Home Ministry — when Mr Sukh Ram preferred his petition in the High Court, questioning the charge sheets.

A senior CBI advocate, Mr A.K.Datt, says Mr Sukh Ram has assailed the charge sheets on a technical ground. His plea before the High Court is that the court could take cognisance of the cases only if the prosecuting agency had obtained prior sanction of the authority competent to remove him from his position.

In support of his contention, Mr Sukh Ram quoted the Supreme Court ruling in the JMM case. In its verdict delivered on April 17 last year, the apex court had held that MPs were public servants and the prosecution would have to seek sanction of the Lok Sabha Speaker in the case of Lok Sabha members and of the Rajya Sabha Chairman in the case of Rajya Sabha members, pending an amendment in the Prevention of Corruption Act.

The CBI had sought sanction to prosecute Ms Runu Ghosh, under Section 19 of the Prevention of Corruption Act and Section 197 of the Cr. PC. In the case of Mr Sukh Ram, however, the CBI had sought the nod of the government under Section 197, Cr. PC alone.

The CBI stand was that the apex court judgement operates prospectively and not retrospectively. The charge sheets were slapped on Mr Sukh Ram much before the judgement was delivered. Therefore, it is not applicable to cases filed against Mr Sukh Ram.

Mr Datt says even if it is presumed for the sake of argument that the Delhi High Court will accept Mr Sukh Ram’s plea, it will not harm the prosecution case. “At the worst, we shall have to seek the sanction of the Lok Sabha Speaker. We shall obtain it. What is the problem in it?” he asks.

Moreover, the High Court did not grant any stay on the trial of cases against Mr Sukh Ram. It was a different matter that the Special Judge wanted to await the verdict of the High Court before proceeding further.

The first charge sheet dated March 17, 1997, named Ms Runu Ghosh, as co-accused, charged Mr Sukh Ram and her with abusing their official position as public servants and causing pecuniary advantage to themselves and to Advance Radio Masts Ltd (ARM), Hyderabad. The charge sheet also named Paturu Rama Rao, Managing Director of ARM, as the third suspect in the conspiracy.

The eight-page charge sheet said: “While functioning as Minister of State for Telecommunications, Mr Sukh Ram issued orders on July 16,1993 to the effect that files relating to procurement should be put up to him after finalisation of tenders and before issuing purchase orders, to facilitate pecuniary advantage to himself and others. Prior to the orders the procurement files were not required to be processed at the level of the Minister of State and were used to be dealt by officials of the DoT as per their delegated financial powers.”

The charge sheet further alleged that notwithstanding the objections raised by officials of the department, Mr Sukh Ram insisted on placing an amended purchase order to ARM for supply of 450 radio systems of the crystal version and 450 systems of the synthesised version at a price of Rs 3,35,639 each.

The actual difference in price between the inferior crystal version and superior synthesised version was Rs 37,170. The total number of crystal version systems supplied by ARM was 450, for which payment was made to the firm at the higher rates. In doing so the total pecuniary advantage to the firm was of Rs 1.66 crore.

The other charge sheet dated June 9,1997, accused Mr Sukh Ram of amassing assets disproportionate to his known sources of income between June 20,1991 and August 16,1996. He was Union Minister from July 2,1992 to May 16,1996.

Mr Sukh Ram’s assets at the beginning of the check period totalled Rs 26.13 lakh. But they exceeded Rs 6 crore at the end of the check period. The total income of Mr Sukh Ram and his wife, during the check period, was found to be Rs 84,98,180. Accounting for the income, expenditure and likely savings during the period, the CBI found that he had assets worth Rs 5,36,67,135 disproportionate to his known sources of income.

When contacted, Mr Sukh Ram refused to react. Enough, he said, had already been written about him. He would not, therefore, offer any comment.

75 YEARS AGO

Indian system of book-keeping

THE following letter has been sent to the Registrar of Panjab University by Mr R.K. Kumar, M.A., Principal, Commercial College, Delhi:-

I have the honour to request the favour of your kindly considering the possibility of introducing Sarrafi (Indian system of book-keeping) and elements of economics as alternative subjects with Geometry and Geography in the Matriculation Examination courses of your university. The Sarrafi system of keeping accounts is quite as efficient as the system of book-keeping by double entry.

The majority of the Indian businessmen, whether dealing with the foreign or home trade, keep their account books on Sarrafi. At present on account of the growing demands of modern commerce, they require the services of capable assistants who may be in a position to help them in their English correspondence work as well, besides their knowledge of Sarrafi.

The Munims of old type lacking in the breadth of knowledge, educated in Sarrafi alone, are not able to meet the demands of India’s growing commerce. The introduction of Sarrafi as an alternative subject will not only keep alive the very important, useful, and comprehensive art of the Indian system of book-keeping, but along with them help a lot in solving the unemployment problem affecting the majority of the educated classes.

The demand for men knowing English and Sarrafi and possessing a certain amount of general ability may at present be said to be very considerable. The knowledge of Sarrafi is regarded as essential for the Inspectors of the Income Tax Department and is a great aid to Munsiffs and Judges dealing with complicated cases.