Justice A D Jagadish Chandra, Madras High Court, dissatisfied with the ‘closure report’ of Directorate of Vigilance & Anti-Corruption, on a complaint filed by RS Bharathi, DMK functionary, has ordered a probe by CBI ‘ into allegations of nepotism and corruption in relation to award of contracts in State Highways Department’ a portfolio held by the Chief Minister Edapadi Palanisami himself. The political reaction is swift, in calls for the resignation of EPS. No surprises there. But let’s get real.
Ever since the demise of Madam Jayalalitha, Tamil Nadu has been a hotbed of political acrimony. We had the spectacle of Sasikala & Co being incarcerated in the disproportionate assets case, then AIADMK splitting into EPS and OPS factions, not to forget the TTV Dhinakaran’s catch of 18 MLAs. The EPS ministry survived a vote of confidence and 11 MLAs of OPS faction, now back in EPS fold, escaped the wrath of the Assembly Speaker and the legal challenge to their ‘escape’ was also defeated. There is the much awaited verdict from the third Judge Justice M.Sathyanarayanan, upon the split verdict between the then Chief Justice Indira Banerjee and Justice M.Sundar- the 18 MLA’s case.
There has been the added spectacle of High Court directing CBI to probe the Gutka scam, followed by raids of the residences of the Health minister Vijayabaskar Reddy and even the Director General of Police. The inevitable, yet ‘clichéd’ calls rung loud, asking for the heads of those in power. Neither the call is new nor the response of disdainful refusal. That is the culture of our ruling elite, and We The People know -“We are Like That Only’.
Madam Jayalalitha resigned only upon conviction by a court of law. Lalu Prasad Yadav resigned and anointed his dear wife Rabri Devi to take his place as Chief Minister of undivided Bihar, only when convicted. Be it a Minister in the Centre or Chief Minister of a State, whoever, our politicians have displayed thick skin and their ‘constitutional protection’ for steadfast disinclination. Only L K Advani showed mettle, in quitting as MP, in the wake of Jain Hawala trial, and getting re elected only after being cleared by Delhi High Court. Rare breed.
The Supreme Court has provided them the cover to do so. In Manoj Narula versus Union of India seeking disqualification of MPs and MLAs as Ministers, the top court rightly asked, “whether a person who has come in conflict with law would be in a position to conscientiously discharge his functions as Minister when his integrity is questioned and whether a person with doubtful integrity can be given the responsibility.” But stopped short by stating that it was for Parliament to make the change. The answers never came.
The Chief Minister of TN has got a lot of wonderful precedents to follow, including those of his own mentor. And the opposition lacks total credibility in seeking his resignation, for they have never followed the rule of Caesar’s wife being above suspicion themselves, when in power. More importantly, the Chief Minister can claim that the order was not even on a petition filed seeking CBI probe and was by a single judge, lending him his legal right to impugn the order.
And it is in such a dismal scenario, we had the Supreme Court in the most recent Public Interest Foundation verdict talking tall on corruption from the pulpit and leaving it to the ‘wisdom of Parliament’ on prohibiting charge-sheeted candidates from even contesting in elections. Glorious opportunity missed. Is there then a legal argument for the resignati on of the CM? None.
(Author is practising advocate in the Madras High Court)
