CEC vs EC
With less than one hundred days to go for the general elections in India, people who were expecting the usual salvos from the political leaders from one another were quite a bit taken aback when it came from Nirvachan Sadan - the home of Election Commission of India. The Chief Election Commissioner of India N. Gopalaswami wrote to President Pratibha Patil with a recommendation that Navin Chawla, Gopalaswami's colleague at the Election Commission be removed from the post of Election Commissioner, accusing him of bias. Gopalaswami's letter was of 93 pages, detailing the reasons for his recommendation along with 500+ pages of annexure. Gopalaswami's recommendation, coming as it does on the eve of general elections, has plunged the Election Commission in to a crisis, and not just that, it’s also is a litmus test for the government.
The current issue between Gopalaswami and Navin Chawla has its origins beginning more than a year ago. In January 2008, Bharatiya Janata Party submitted a memo against EC Navin Chawla to the CEC Gopalaswami. Their allegation was that Navin Chawla is biased towards the ruling Congress party and also that the Election Commissioner has obtained bribes from the Members of Parliament Local Area Development Scheme (shortly known as MPLADS) funds from at least five Congress MPs (A.A. Khan, R.P. Goenka, Ambika Soni, Dr Karan Singh and A.R. Kidwai) for a trust (Lala Chamanlal Education Trust) that Navin Chawla ran along with his wife Rupika Chawla. The same trust, which is based in Jaipur was also given land of about six acres by the Government of Rajasthan, then headed by a Congress man Ashok Gehlot (Incidentally, Congress has just returned to power in Rajasthan under the same Ashok Gehlot). Based on the above allegations, the main opposition party petitioned the Chief Election Commissioner N. Gopalaswami to remove Election Commissioner Navin Chawla.
When the above memo was submitted, preparations for the Karnataka Assembly elections were already underway. Gopalaswami, after consulting the legal experts on the matter, waited for the Assembly elections to get over and sends a notice to Navin Chawla, along with BJP's memo seeking his answer against the allegations. By this time, Navin Chawla went on a month long leave. As many as eight reminders later, Navin Chawla replied back stating that he is seeking legal help about the matter and writes to the Law Ministry. Finally, on 10th December 2008, Navin Chawla replied with a 150 page letter denying BJP's allegations.
Little over a month later, the CEC writes to the President recommending Chawla's removal. Gopalaswami has detailed 12 specific cases of partisanship and annexed several hundred pages of the Election Commission minutes, internal correspondence, etc in support of the case he has built up against his colleague. Gopalaswami notes that whenever the full bench of the Election Commission was seized of an issue, Chawla will make an excuse of going to the bathroom.
Soon after, invariably, the CEC got phone calls from top Congress functionaries even as the meeting was in progress. The CEC in no uncertain terms has expressed that inside deliberations and details of the meetings were invariably being conveyed to Congress party.
From what is available in the public domain so far, there is no legally tenable evidence to prove that Chawla talked to the Congress leaders and leaked the EC's decisions, but there are numerous cases of circumstantial evidence to prove that Chawla was all the time in touch with Congress leaders.
President Pratibha Patil is understood to have forwarded the CEC's recommendations to the Central Government, which ought to have taken a decision by now. The issue is not just about one bureaucrat acusing the other. It assumes urgency due to the fact that N. Gopalaswami retires as CEC on April 20, 2009. The person who is tipped to succeed him is none other than Navin Chawla. Another reason for the urgent disposal of this matter is because the country will be in the midst of the electoral process when the change of baton takes place at Nirvachan Sadan. Thus the unprecedented step by Gopalaswami just a few weeks before his retirement has raked up a huge political controversy and can lead to a crisis of confidence in the Election Commission especially if Chawla is appointed by the government to the top Constitutional post without addressing the issues raised by the CEC.
When the media got hold of the CEC's recommendation to the President, quite expectedly it opened a can of worms. Most of the political parties, barring the Opposition BJP, blamed Gopalaswami for having precipitated a crisis at the eleventh hour. The fact of the matter was that Chawla was responsible for the inordinate delay by the CEC to make his recommendation. While the reaction of the political parties are very much on the expected lines, surprisingly, most in the mainstream media has chosen to attack the CEC over the timing of the recommendation, notwithstanding the fact that CEC's unprecedented action has only strengthened the democracy. Legal experts and former attorney generals are divided on whether Article 324(5) of the Constitution can be used suo moto by the CEC Gopalaswami.
While N. Gopalaswami's career has remained spotless so far, it will be interesting to look at the history of Navin Chawla. An IAS officer of 1969 batch, Navin Chawla started his career as a Sub-Divisional magistrate in Delhi. At the early stages of his career, Chawla had his loyalty towards the first family of Congress that his actions found detailed mention in the report of Shah Commission, which was formed to probe the excesses committed during the Emergency (1975-77). As a low-ranking bureaucrat during the Emergency (Navin Chawla was private secretary to the lieutenant governor of Delhi, Kishan Chand) Chawla, along with his cohorts in the police at the time, 'exercised enormous powers during the emergency because they had easy access to the then prime minister Indira Gandhi's house. Their approach to the problems of the period relating to the citizens was authoritarian and callous. They grossly misused their position and abused their powers in cynical disregard of the welfare of the citizens, and in the process rendered themselves unfit to hold any public office which demands an attitude of fair play and consideration for others. The Shah Commission noted that in their relish for power, they completely subverted the normal channels of command and administrative procedures.
Another committee headed by L.P.Singh, that was set up to advise follow-up action on the Shah Committee, opined that Chawla unfit to hold any public office and that he deserved to be summarily dismissed from service without any further inquiry or proceedings. Had it not been for the bureaucratic delays and the subsequent fall of the Janata Party government led by Charan Singh, Navin Chawla would not have been an national embarassment that he is now. Fall of Charan Singh's government and the subsequent return of Indira Gandhi to power resulted in those indicted by Shah Commission including Navin Chawla getting restored to plump positions in the corridors of power.
The Election Commission was envisaged by the Founding Fathers of the Constitution as an independent body and hence cannot and should not be seen to serve any political party. It is vital that this sensitive constitutional body is occupied by person of integrity, impartiality and independence. The Election Commission's claim to neutrality and objectivity should not be allowed to be marred by one controversial bureaucrat. Appointing a person with Navin Chawla's credentials itself is a brazen defiance of norms of accountability in public life. This is very much apart from the allegations related to Chawla's trust receiving land from Rajasthan Government and funds from the MPLADS, as mentioned earlier in this post. At the time of writing, Congress has been vehemently opposing CEC Gopalaswami's recommendation and has been insisting that Navin Chawla would take over as CEC after April 20, 2009.
It is not just the Congress that tries to place its favourite men at sensitive positions. Back in February 2004, just before the eve of the last general elections, when J.M. Lyngdoh retired as CEC, Atal Behari Vajpayee's NDA government was not keen on elevating the senior-most Commissioner, T.S. Krishnamurthy. It had reportedly zeroed in on a former Cabinet Secretary, T.R. Prasad, as the CEC. The government is not duty bound to elevate the senior-most Commissioner as the chief. However, the convention was clear and in favour of T.S. Krishnamurthy. It was only the threat of resignation by the two Commissioners, Krishnamurthy and B.B. Tandon (who later became the CEC upon Krishnamurthy's retirement and who handed over the baton to the incumbent Gopalaswami), that dissuaded the Vajpayee government from taking the precipitous step.
Coming back to the current crisis, moral wisdom demands that Government remove Navin Chawla at once, even if it appears to favour the opposition. But, how practical is it to expect this bit of justice from a party that installed a disgraced person at the Rashtrapathi Bhavan and a puppet at 7 Race Course Road, New Delhi.
The current issue between Gopalaswami and Navin Chawla has its origins beginning more than a year ago. In January 2008, Bharatiya Janata Party submitted a memo against EC Navin Chawla to the CEC Gopalaswami. Their allegation was that Navin Chawla is biased towards the ruling Congress party and also that the Election Commissioner has obtained bribes from the Members of Parliament Local Area Development Scheme (shortly known as MPLADS) funds from at least five Congress MPs (A.A. Khan, R.P. Goenka, Ambika Soni, Dr Karan Singh and A.R. Kidwai) for a trust (Lala Chamanlal Education Trust) that Navin Chawla ran along with his wife Rupika Chawla. The same trust, which is based in Jaipur was also given land of about six acres by the Government of Rajasthan, then headed by a Congress man Ashok Gehlot (Incidentally, Congress has just returned to power in Rajasthan under the same Ashok Gehlot). Based on the above allegations, the main opposition party petitioned the Chief Election Commissioner N. Gopalaswami to remove Election Commissioner Navin Chawla.
When the above memo was submitted, preparations for the Karnataka Assembly elections were already underway. Gopalaswami, after consulting the legal experts on the matter, waited for the Assembly elections to get over and sends a notice to Navin Chawla, along with BJP's memo seeking his answer against the allegations. By this time, Navin Chawla went on a month long leave. As many as eight reminders later, Navin Chawla replied back stating that he is seeking legal help about the matter and writes to the Law Ministry. Finally, on 10th December 2008, Navin Chawla replied with a 150 page letter denying BJP's allegations.
Little over a month later, the CEC writes to the President recommending Chawla's removal. Gopalaswami has detailed 12 specific cases of partisanship and annexed several hundred pages of the Election Commission minutes, internal correspondence, etc in support of the case he has built up against his colleague. Gopalaswami notes that whenever the full bench of the Election Commission was seized of an issue, Chawla will make an excuse of going to the bathroom.
Soon after, invariably, the CEC got phone calls from top Congress functionaries even as the meeting was in progress. The CEC in no uncertain terms has expressed that inside deliberations and details of the meetings were invariably being conveyed to Congress party.
From what is available in the public domain so far, there is no legally tenable evidence to prove that Chawla talked to the Congress leaders and leaked the EC's decisions, but there are numerous cases of circumstantial evidence to prove that Chawla was all the time in touch with Congress leaders.
President Pratibha Patil is understood to have forwarded the CEC's recommendations to the Central Government, which ought to have taken a decision by now. The issue is not just about one bureaucrat acusing the other. It assumes urgency due to the fact that N. Gopalaswami retires as CEC on April 20, 2009. The person who is tipped to succeed him is none other than Navin Chawla. Another reason for the urgent disposal of this matter is because the country will be in the midst of the electoral process when the change of baton takes place at Nirvachan Sadan. Thus the unprecedented step by Gopalaswami just a few weeks before his retirement has raked up a huge political controversy and can lead to a crisis of confidence in the Election Commission especially if Chawla is appointed by the government to the top Constitutional post without addressing the issues raised by the CEC.
When the media got hold of the CEC's recommendation to the President, quite expectedly it opened a can of worms. Most of the political parties, barring the Opposition BJP, blamed Gopalaswami for having precipitated a crisis at the eleventh hour. The fact of the matter was that Chawla was responsible for the inordinate delay by the CEC to make his recommendation. While the reaction of the political parties are very much on the expected lines, surprisingly, most in the mainstream media has chosen to attack the CEC over the timing of the recommendation, notwithstanding the fact that CEC's unprecedented action has only strengthened the democracy. Legal experts and former attorney generals are divided on whether Article 324(5) of the Constitution can be used suo moto by the CEC Gopalaswami.
While N. Gopalaswami's career has remained spotless so far, it will be interesting to look at the history of Navin Chawla. An IAS officer of 1969 batch, Navin Chawla started his career as a Sub-Divisional magistrate in Delhi. At the early stages of his career, Chawla had his loyalty towards the first family of Congress that his actions found detailed mention in the report of Shah Commission, which was formed to probe the excesses committed during the Emergency (1975-77). As a low-ranking bureaucrat during the Emergency (Navin Chawla was private secretary to the lieutenant governor of Delhi, Kishan Chand) Chawla, along with his cohorts in the police at the time, 'exercised enormous powers during the emergency because they had easy access to the then prime minister Indira Gandhi's house. Their approach to the problems of the period relating to the citizens was authoritarian and callous. They grossly misused their position and abused their powers in cynical disregard of the welfare of the citizens, and in the process rendered themselves unfit to hold any public office which demands an attitude of fair play and consideration for others. The Shah Commission noted that in their relish for power, they completely subverted the normal channels of command and administrative procedures.
Another committee headed by L.P.Singh, that was set up to advise follow-up action on the Shah Committee, opined that Chawla unfit to hold any public office and that he deserved to be summarily dismissed from service without any further inquiry or proceedings. Had it not been for the bureaucratic delays and the subsequent fall of the Janata Party government led by Charan Singh, Navin Chawla would not have been an national embarassment that he is now. Fall of Charan Singh's government and the subsequent return of Indira Gandhi to power resulted in those indicted by Shah Commission including Navin Chawla getting restored to plump positions in the corridors of power.
The Election Commission was envisaged by the Founding Fathers of the Constitution as an independent body and hence cannot and should not be seen to serve any political party. It is vital that this sensitive constitutional body is occupied by person of integrity, impartiality and independence. The Election Commission's claim to neutrality and objectivity should not be allowed to be marred by one controversial bureaucrat. Appointing a person with Navin Chawla's credentials itself is a brazen defiance of norms of accountability in public life. This is very much apart from the allegations related to Chawla's trust receiving land from Rajasthan Government and funds from the MPLADS, as mentioned earlier in this post. At the time of writing, Congress has been vehemently opposing CEC Gopalaswami's recommendation and has been insisting that Navin Chawla would take over as CEC after April 20, 2009.
It is not just the Congress that tries to place its favourite men at sensitive positions. Back in February 2004, just before the eve of the last general elections, when J.M. Lyngdoh retired as CEC, Atal Behari Vajpayee's NDA government was not keen on elevating the senior-most Commissioner, T.S. Krishnamurthy. It had reportedly zeroed in on a former Cabinet Secretary, T.R. Prasad, as the CEC. The government is not duty bound to elevate the senior-most Commissioner as the chief. However, the convention was clear and in favour of T.S. Krishnamurthy. It was only the threat of resignation by the two Commissioners, Krishnamurthy and B.B. Tandon (who later became the CEC upon Krishnamurthy's retirement and who handed over the baton to the incumbent Gopalaswami), that dissuaded the Vajpayee government from taking the precipitous step.
Coming back to the current crisis, moral wisdom demands that Government remove Navin Chawla at once, even if it appears to favour the opposition. But, how practical is it to expect this bit of justice from a party that installed a disgraced person at the Rashtrapathi Bhavan and a puppet at 7 Race Course Road, New Delhi.
posted by Indian Voter at 5:45:00 AM
2 Comments:
The post covers the root cause of the issue and exposes the partisan attitude of both the non-BJP parties and the media.
Hope you would have seen the details that most of our news channels are either backed by high profile world-known christian missionaries or Communists. Can you please write more about this.
Here below I reproduce the news related to this post:
http://www.expressbuzz.com/edition/searchresult.aspx?AliasName=qK1tLBLX%7CpILczN\
iCZRSYEHJtp5ChTm2
Our Delhi Bureau
February 04, 2009
Chief Election Commissioner Needamangalam Gopalaswami is a stickler.
For rules. For details. For discipline. For principles. For values.
For him, there is only one way of doing things: The right way.
He is known to make copious notes about how every hour of his day
passes. "He jots down details in a tiny diary. Even if you speak to
him on the phone for a few minutes, your name and details of the
conversation go into that tiny diary," revealed a friend who has known
the CEC for 20 years.
So, the moment he decided to recommend Navin Chawla's [Images] removal
from the post of election commissioner, Gopalaswami retreated into a
one-of-its-kind library. "It is more like a room where all these
diaries, which he has kept labeled in serial order over a period of
time, are strewn all over the place," the friend said.
Gopalaswami turned to these diaries for factual accuracy. People close
to the CEC that his keen eye for detail and habit of keeping
meticulous notes led him to believe that Chawla was leaking
information during his toilet breaks.
"That he drafted a 12-point recommendation running into more than 90
pages is a fact everyone knows. What many don't know is that he went
over it again and again and again. He revised the draft nine times
before forwarding it to President Pratibha Patil [Images]," the friend
said.
What might appear extraordinary or eccentric to the casual observer is
but second nature for Gopalaswami, who is fondly referred to as Gopu
by some colleagues.
An Indian Administrative Service officer from the 1966 batch, his
first posting was in Surat [Images]. Gopalaswami, a former student of
St Stephen's College, had stood second in the mandatory Gujarati test
for officers from outside Gujarat.
He worked to ensure the best possible civic infrastructure for the
industrial town. He became so popular that local political leaders
said he could easily win an election if he ever chose to contest.
During his stint in Gujarat, senior leaders like Chimanbhai Patel and
Hitendra Desai are known to have diverted their adversaries to
Gopalaswami, knowing there was no better person at snubbing unwanted
elements. When a local leader approached him with a bribe of Rs 5,000
early in his tenure, Gopalaswami first intimated the chief minister
and then called the police.
This kind of adherence to values has made him the person that he is
today, people close to Gopalaswami say.
"If you go to his residence, he won't even offer you a glass of water.
He may even eat in front of you without offering you anything," a
close friend said. This attitude is more because of a
give-nothing-take-nothing principle than anything else, insiders say.
And friends say he could swallow what he dished out. A teetotaler with
simple and clean eating habits, he is never known to have eaten a
single meal outside his home.
"He had to attend so many dinner meetings. In the two decades or so
that I have known him, I have never seen him eat outside," a friend
said, adding, "He will entertain you in the drawing room and may talk
to you for two hours, but there won't be a single offer for any
refreshments or even water."
Gopalaswami follows his set of rules at the workplace too. He used to
leave office at 9 pm. "His brief to his office was that he wouldn't
sign any papers between 8.30 pm and 9 pm. 'If a guy comes running to
your car as you are leaving and wants something signed in a hurry,
that is where corruption begins' was his motto," an observer said.
Sources in the bureaucracy say that not just Gopalaswami, but two more
officers from the 1966 IAS batch are cast in the same mould.
"They are a terror for other officers due to their upright nature:
Gopalaswami, then Union Home Secretary P Shankar and Chief Vigilance
Officer and Cabinet Secretary B K Chaturvedi. They were called the
teen murtis," the source added.
"The first two are often clubbed together and dubbed as Gopu and
Shanku -- that is also how they address each other. They have forged a
very close relationship over the years and are still very close," he
said.
Apart from such professionalism, another thing that Gopalaswami wears
on his sleeve is his faith. "Though he sports the Iyengar sweecharnam
(tilak), he leans more on the spiritual side than the religious side.
He is a very secular person," said the friend about the staunch
god-fearing Vaishnavaite.
"When Vaishnavite spiritual leaders visit Delhi [Images], temple
authorities here ask Gopalaswami to deliver the welcome address. He
recites the Tiruppavai during the month of Margazhi. He has also
visited all the divyadesams -- the 108 holy pilgrimage sites for
Vaishnavites," the source added.
The CEC also sports a keen interest in astrology and is remarkably
tech-savvy, informs the friend.
When the Election Commission started the process of delimitations of
constituencies, the CEC suggested that Google maps be used for the
arduous exercise.
He also played a very crucial role in designing the software that will
be employed in the 2011 census.
A lesser known facet of Gopalaswami is the role he has played in
preserving the Vedas.
"Some parts of the ancient Hindu scriptures, like the sama Veda, are
only orally taught. They have been passed on through the Gurukul
system and through Shruti lessons. Goplaswami, who wanted to preserve
such things for posterity, was instrumental in securing a Rs 5 crore
(Rs 50 million) grant from UNESCO," a source said.
What ultimately defines the CEC's current predicament -- more than all
the above -- are these two incidents.
"He and The Hindu's Editor-in-Chief N Ram met each other when the
latter invited him to lecture the newspaper's staff in Chennai. From
that time, the two became close and Ram used to speak to him on a
daily basis. On the day he forwarded the recommendation to the
President, Ram got wind of it and called Gopalaswami and asked him if
what he had heard was true. Since he is not the kind of man who would
lie about anything, Gopalaswami merely said yes, and Ram went ahead
with his story. Otherwise, this would have remained an internal
matter," a source close to Gopalaswami said.
The other incident only highlights how the stickler also has a clearly
demarcated sense of personal equations and professionals
responsibilities. "When the controversy surrounding Chawla started
brewing, at the behest of Ram, Chawla paid a surprise visit to
Gopalaswami at his residence on Diwali, carrying sweets. The two spoke
for a long time and Chawla shared some personal problems with
Gopalaswami. As he was leaving, Chawla even made an elaborate gesture
of respect towards Gopalaswami and sought his blessings. Gopalaswami
wished him well," the source said.
HI IV,
Did you get a chance to read Mr.Gopalaswami's letter to N.Ram in The HINDU and Ram's reply?
As expected the Government has refused to take action against Chawla. Can you please update this post with your views?
Thanks.
Post a Comment
<< Home