Of Fuss
& Controversy Unwarranted
One fails to understand the fuss over counsel for NGO Centre
for Public Interest Litigation (CPIL) Prashant Bhushan being pressed for
disclosing the name of the whistleblower who provided him a copy of the entry
register maintained at CBI Director Ranjit Sinnha's residence containing the
names of persons who met him at his official residence.
To an extent, Prashant Bhushan is right in refusing to
divulge the whistleblower's identity in the interest of the latter's personal
safety claiming that "it would
expose him to serious risks of bodily harm, harassment and victimisation
besides setting a bad precedent". Among those who waited upon the CBI
Director at his house are very influential and resourceful people who felt as
much embarrassed by the disclosures as did the CBI Director. Question naturally
arises Why did they prefer Sinha's residence over his office and why did he
condescend to entertain them at his residence and not in his office?
Disclosure by such daredevils of information has embarrassed
high-ups, landed them in trouble in criminal investigations and some found
guilty by courts. There is also no dearth of instances where numerous people
who dared to make incriminating information public had to face the wrath of
government functionaries and others. Some of them had to lose their right to
life even. So their security of life remains of paramount concern.
In these circumstances, what is vital is not the identity of
the whistleblower who lifted the veil of secrecy but the veracity of the
disclosures. As long as the facts
brought out by them are not disputed, their identity is immaterial. They need
to be identified and named the moment they are discovered to have played havoc with
facts causing unwarranted hurt to the image of the persons harmed by their
disclosures which they knew were not genuine. In such an eventuality, they not
only need to be fully exposed but severely punished too.
In the meantime, the Supreme Court on September 22 decided to
review its order directing Prashant Bhushan to disclose the identity of the
person who provided him the information.
CONTROVERSY UNWARRANTED
Politics in the country seems to be touching a new
low each day. The latest is the instance of the former Civil Aviation Minister
Ajit Singh who whipped up public sentiments on the petty issue of his being
asked to vacate his official residence in Delhi after the people of his area
rejected him in the June elections to Parliament and he ceased to be a
minister. On the one hand he announced that he is going to vacate the official
residence and, on the other, he whipped up people's sentiments by organising a
violent protest in his area where his supporters even threatened to cut-off
water supply to Delhi.
He had been occupying this very house which was
the residence of his late father Chaudhary Charan Singh who became prime
minister of the country courtesy not a majority in Lok Sabha but of an intrigue
hatched by late Mrs. Indira Gandhi who was not fascinated by him to see him a
prime minister of the country but smarting at the loss of power and yearning
for revenge to overthrow by hook or crook the then Janta Party government
headed by Morarjee Desai. Charan Singh
fell into Indira's trap. After parting company with Morarjee and his Janta
Party, he was able to be sworn in as PM on July 28, 1979 but had to resign on
August 24 when Mrs. Gandhi refused to honour her promise of support. Instead of
going to Parliament waiting for him to seek a vote of confidence Chaudhary
Charan Singh went to the President to resign. He earned the distinction of
being a Prime Minister just for 24 days without having faced the Parliament. Ajit
Singh inherited the political legacy of his father by representing the latter's
Baghpat parliamentary constituency unhindered. In the process he made history
by his party RLD enter into a marriage of convenience with friends and foes
alike. Thus he made the proverbial term of "sleeping with the enemy" a
reality in his political career. In 2009 Lok Sabha elections his party
contested as an NDA constituent but when BJP led NDA failed to make the mark
the magnet of power was strong enough to lure Ajit Singh to part company with
NDA and land into the Congress lap against whom his party had fought elections.
Ajit Singh's demand to convert the house he was
occupying as a memorial for his late
father and former prime minister Chaudhary Charan Singh was a ploy to retain
this house on one pretext or the other. On the vey face of it, his belated
demand now looks funny. Charan Singh died on May 29, 1987. In VP Singh's Janta
Dal government in 1989 and later in UPA government Ajit Singh was the Industry
Minister amd Civil Aviation Minister, respectively. During the last 27 years
never did it occur to him that his father deserved a memorial and that too the
house he was occupying. No further comment needed. ***
