The art of defending sleaze

The art of defending sleaze

Our “non-political” prime minister has been delivering a command performance of late, flitting from lecturing Indian business on the responsibilities of corporate governance to expressing great concern for the underprivileged. But none of this causes him to show visible discomfort when called upon to defend the indefensible. In fact, he has become so good at the political about-turn and any presumed necessary double-speak, that those who have been coveting his job are now reduced to the brink of despair. There seems little doubt that Dr. Manmohan Singh will complete his full term in office because he has shown a steely determination to hang on to his job and do whatever this takes. But the price of this security of tenure may well be the aiding and abetting of a developing situation that has the potential of subverting the spirit, if not the letter of our constitution. Of course, Dr. Singh knows that if he says no, there is a line of Congressmen only too eager to say yes in his place. Still, we may, by virtue of this most unusual of presidential elections coming up, be heading for a situation in the not too distant future that echoes the authoritarian interlude in our political past. We may also be heading for a future coronation rubber-stamped by every institution of constitutional significance.

The prime minister, in being his pliable self, is inexorably paving the way for a consolidation of political power without responsibility, that began, ironically, with his own appointment three years ago. But in the current situation, not only has Dr. Singh demonstrated the obtuseness necessary to defend the murkiest presidential candidate in independent India’s history, but he has done it with the practiced and blatant assertion of an accomplished politician undisturbed by paradox or hypocrisy. In the face of a barrage of allegations presented by print and electronic media alike on top of a clamour from the political opposition, Dr. Singh has had no difficulty in dismissing all the uncovered sleaze on Mrs. Patil as just so much “mudslinging”.

But then, we should remember that Dr. Singh has had three years of experience at defending a sprinkling of alleged murderers and financial skimmers and scamsters that populate his party, those of his coalition partners, the UPA’s parliamentary supporters - and a few such have found berths even within the union cabinet. Some of these duly elected worthies Dr. Singh has seen fit to appoint, and defend, up to the moment when they have been convicted and hauled off to jail. Others, with similar contours, are still waiting for the allegations to stick in the form of a conviction or two, and the prime minister is perfectly happy to wait alongside. The alibi, as always, is the lofty principle of presumed innocence till proven guilty which in India is turning into the rule of criminals instead of being proved by the exception.

This being broadly so, why should it be different in the case of Mrs. Pratibha Patil, a lady candidate chosen and agreed upon, incredibly, only after scrutinising a long list of eminent but presumably less pliable candidates? Allegations of fraud, embezzlement and murder and a clutch of legal cases arising out of these issues hovering around her and her immediate family have not been considered deterrents! The calculation may well be that due legal process in India is so tardy that there is little possibility of Mrs. Patil’s court cases becoming an embarrassment in the near future or perhaps even throughout her expected tenure of five years.

Meanwhile, Dr. Singh, the ruling coalition and its parliamentary supporters outside the government, have the brute numbers to elect Mrs. Pratibha Patil to be the 12th president of India. And that is precisely what they will do unless the parliamentarians pull an upset by voting their conscience during the secret ballot. But this is a remote possibility, and the ruling coalition will probably place, in the form and person of Mrs.Pratibha Patil, a rubber stamp by any other name, in Rashtrapati Bhavan. This appears to be a strategic consideration of great importance and apparently needs to be put in place before the general elections roll around in 2009.

The prime minister was himself elevated to his high office by virtue of his skills as an economist and his reputation as an architect of the reforms, but also because he has no grass roots support of his own, and significantly, because of his temperament. This temperament allows Dr. Singh to aid an abet the installing of a pliable and “committed” president in a throwback to the tactics last practiced by Indira Gandhi when she appointed Giani Zail Singh. But while this latest attempt at institutional subversion goes to weaken the very roots of the national fabric, the true worry lies in the kind of documents an over committed and compromised president can affix her signature and seal to. The outgoing president Dr. Kalam had the temerity to return several bills for reconsideration. Will a Mrs. Patil as president and commander in chief of our armed forces, beholden as she must feel, dare to even voice a contradictory opinion?

Our prime minister has not been able to do so because of the peculiarity of circumstance that put him in office, and very soon, it seems inevitable, neither will the President of India be able to do so. With this presidential election a foregone conclusion, the only future remedy is to change this travesty of democratic process, more suited to Zimbabwe than New Delhi, at the ballot box. Let us hope that in the interim there are no laws passed to prevent multi-party democracy, no fresh “emergencies” and no useful bans on certain sections of the polity. If all the truth leaches out of the ballot box, our very next election could turn up trumped up results. With the prime minister’s office and the president’s turned into pocket boroughs how long before we get a nice reasonable deaf mute into the Chief Election Commissioner’s chair? And what about a mentally retarded Chief Justice thereafter? 2009 may be our last chance to set this effrontery right. Because if we aren’t very careful, the world’s largest democracy could well end up as the world’s biggest series of rubber stamps.

(1,047 words)

Title: The art of defending sleaze
By GHATOTKACH
Tuesday, 03 July 2007

Also published by The Pioneer www.dailypioneer.com on 6th July 2007 on the Edit-page in the main Opinion slot as "Zen and the art of deceit"

This and all other essays on GHATOTKACHSERIES are copyright 2005-2007 by Gautam Mukherjee. All rights reserved.