New Delhi: The Prime Minister's Office (PMO) has refused to disclose communications exchanged between former Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee and Chief Minister Narendra Modi during the 2002 Gujarat riots even after 11 years.
Responding to an RTI application, the Prime Minister's Office cited section 8(1)(h) of the transparency law, which exempts information that would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders.
Nearly 2,000 people were killed in the post-Godhra riots. The refusal could potentially raise questions whether the communications between Modi and Vajpayee contained any information related to rioters or people behind the riots.
The RTI applicant had also sought a copy of all communications exchanged between the PMO and the Gujarat government between February 27, 2002 and April 30, 2002 on the law and order situation in Gujarat in the aftermath of the riots.
Ever since the post-Godhra 2002 riots, reports have persisted that Vajpayee had told Modi to follow "raj dharma"-- to deliver good governance and justice without any discrimination on the basis of caste or religion.
But Modi has maintained that the then prime minister had said he was following "raj dharma".
Prime Minister Manmohan Singh at a poll rally in Jaipur on November 21 had attacked the Gujarat Chief Minister with a remark that a former prime minister had reportedly made on raj dharma. Without naming either leader, Singh said a BJP chief minister had faced so many allegations that a former prime minister had once told him to follow "raj dharma".
Singh's remarks came following an attack by Modi on the Rajasthan government for alleged violation of the human rights of minorities in the desert state.
Seeking to rebut Singh's "raj dharma" jibe at Jaipur, Modi told an election rally in Gwalior that Vajpayee never pulled him up for not abiding by raj dharma, rather he praised him.
"Atal Bihari Vajpayee ne hamein rajdharma ka palan karna sikhaya aur hamne kiya. Isi se BJP sarkaron ki vahvahi ho rahi hai" (Vajpayee tutored me in rajdharma and I have adhered to it. This is the reason why BJP governments are being lauded everywhere), Modi had said.
While refusing disclosure of information, the country's top office did not give any reasons as to how disclosure of information would attract section 8(1)(h) even though Delhi High Court has made it clear that cogent reasons be given while denying information under the clause.
"It is apparent that the mere existence of an investigation process cannot be a ground for refusal of the information; the authority withholding information must show satisfactory reasons as to why the release of such information would hamper the investigation process. Such reasons should be germane, and the opinion of the process being hampered should be reasonable and based on some material. Sans this consideration, Section 8(1)(h) and other such provisions would become the haven for dodging demands for information," Justice Ravindra Bhat had held.
