Author:
Publication: The Hindu
Date: September 24, 2002
URL: http://www.hindu.com/thehindu/op/2002/09/24/stories/2002092400070200.htm
While the `nativity' as a criterion
for eligibility is not a legally sustainable issue, though an emotional
one on which the electorate can be swayed, other issues merit re-examination
as they appear to be germane to a political and legal debate on the eligibility
and suitability of Sonia Gandhi as Prime Minister.
It was in the context of a letter
from three Congressmen, Sharad Pawar, Purna Sangma and Tariq Anwar, in
the early months of 1999, that the issue of eligibility and suitability
of Sonia Gandhi for being Prime Minister received public attention. The
three Congressmen, two from the West and one from the East, had argued
that "it was not possible that a country of 980 million with a wealth of
education, competence and ability can have anyone other than an Indian,
born of Indian soil, to head its government," and that it was "an issue
which affects not just the security, the economic interest, and the international
image of India but hits at the core pride of every Indian."
In an opinion piece "Sonia Gandhi,
as Prime Minister... not as yet" (Open Page, May 4, 1999), I had argued
that the foreign birth of Sonia Gandhi, a naturalised citizen, was not
a legal or the most relevant issue since (a) the Indian Constitution does
not bar a naturalised citizen from holding high offices, though the Constitution
of the U.S., a land of immigrants, has a provision that only those born
in the U.S. can become the President, Vice President and the Chief Justice;
(b) persons of Indian origin had become Prime Ministers and Presidents
of other nations (Mauritius: Kassam Uteem as President, Anirudh Jagannath
and Navinchandra Ramgoolam as Prime Minister; Trinidad and Tobago: Noor
Hassan Ali President, Basdeo Pandey Prime Minister; British Guyana: Cheddy
Jagan Prime Minister; Fiji: Mahendra Chaudhry Prime Minister; (c) France:
Napoleon, a Corsican by birth, became Emperor of France; Germany: Adolf
Hitler, an Austrian, became the Fuehrer.
Even for the Congress presidentship,
Indian nativity was not the most relevant issue since Allen Octavian Hume,
Wedderburn, Annie Besant and Nellie Sen Gupta, all foreigners, had served
as presidents of the party.
Political maturity
It was also argued then that one
must judge a Prime Ministerial candidate by the personal qualities and
professional qualification and experience and that Sonia Gandhi was neither
politically mature nor administratively experienced enough to be Prime
Minister.
It did seem that the issue receded
in public mind, but this time, a leader from the South, Jayalalithaa, has
reopened the question with a frontal attack on the credentials of Sonia
Gandhi for the Prime Ministership of India, two years ahead of the next
general elections. Congressmen have counter attacked Jayalalithaa and have
organised dharnas in different parts of the country, provoking Jayalalithaa
into promising a countrywide campaign on this issue. One had earlier suspected
that Jayalalithaa's attack was only a riposte to the Congress-TMC merger
at Madurai. Should the whole question of Sonia Gandhi's eligibility and
suitability for Prime Ministership be re- examined?
It seems now, as it seemed then,
that Sonia Gandhi's capabilities have to be judged by her administrative
experience and political capability. The nation has not seen her as the
head of even a State Government and one should reserve judgment on her
administrative ability. Her stewardship of the Congress party has not been
such as to invite hosannas. The sad but harsh fact is that even Congressmen
are unhappy with the coterie that continues to command her attention more
than the common party worker. Sharad Pawar had argued in 1999 that "People
who cannot win a Lok Sabha poll and convince their own constituents of
their relevance, are now facing cameras and act as party spokespersons."
This seems to be so even now. The only change seen in the Congress is that
Arjun Singh who was twice rejected by the electorate and Pranab Mukherjee,
who had not faced any election, are now replaced by the likes of Natwar
Singh and Manmohan Singh who were rejected by the electorate. There are
exceptions among her supporters like Das Munshi and Mani Shankar Aiyar
who returned to the Lok Sabha with electorate's endorsement and have a
right to be heard.
The question of Sonia Gandhi's personal
political acumen still leaves one groping for a clear answer. We cannot
perhaps ignore even at this point of time her naïve accusation at
a public meeting in Amethi in 1995, that the Government run by her own
partymen was tardy in the investigation and trial of persons accused of
assassinating Rajiv Gandhi. She simply did not know the stage of the trial
in the Sriperumbudur court. Again when she claimed the support of 272 MPs,
before an indulgent President, when she could not muster more than 233
members, it was both poor arithmetic and even worse, pathetic political
gamesmanship that the nation witnessed.
Other issues
While Sharad Pawar, Sangma and Anwar,
the `Amar, Anthony and Akbar' of the Congress, raised only the question
of nativity and let the nation judge the leadership capability of Sonia
Gandhi, the nation responded by reducing the Congress to its lowest ever
Lok Sabha membership. Jayalalithaa has raised a host of issues, apart from
the eligibility and suitability of Antonia Maino Gandhi - like her lack
of love for India evidenced by the 12-year delay in applying for naturalisation,
after she became the bahu of the Prime Minister, her involvement in `antique
smuggling' case, her misuse of proximity to the Prime Minister of the country,
to help Snam Progetti, an Italian firm, in fertilizer and oil sector and
the as yet unclosed Bofors case.
While the `nativity' as a criterion
for eligibility is not a legally sustainable issue, though an emotional
one on which the electorate can be swayed, the other issues merit re-examination
as they appear to be germane to a political and legal debate on the eligibility
and suitability questions. The core issues in the recent Supreme Court
decision and the ordinance on electoral reforms which are relevant for
a cleaner and saner public life and efficient governance appear pertinent.
Will Sonia Gandhi be found wanting
in this regard? It does appear that she is not clear of her culpability,
personal and professional, in some of the questionable aspects of the infamous
deals of the Seventies and the Eighties and she needs to come out of these
first, not by delaying and obstructing the legal process but by participating
and getting herself legally cleared of charges. In the now forgotten Maruti
case of influence peddling of the Seventies, it was Sanjay Gandhi who bore
the opprobrium, while Sonia Gandhi, designated as Director (?) in charge
of Technical Services of Maruti, did derive pecuniary benefit but stays
clear. Again, Sonia's proximity to and mutually benefiting association
with Ottavio Quattrocchi, head of Italian firm Snam Progetti's Indian operations,
is far too well known for her to outlive them. A whole range of deals in
fertilizer sector that raised questions of Italian connection to the Prime
Minister's residence have gone under the carpet. Adding to the embarrassment
are the charges of "antique smuggling" into Italy. It is also well known
that Sonia Gandhi's relatives run some shops in Italy and all that it needs
at the Indian airports is a little bit of leaning by the NSG guards or
"a call from no. 10", as it is known in Delhi, to secure immigration and
customs clearance. That she is not the only politician misusing the privileges,
may, at best, be only a weak defence.
Far more damaging in import and
consequence is the Bofors bribe case pending for over a decade. This has
several curious threads leading to Sonia Gandhi. Among these are the suspected
involvement of Ottavio Quattrocchi, Italian family friend of Sonia Gandhi,
who tried to cut into the commissions Bofors were paying to their long
time agent Win Chaddha and now an accused hiding in Malaysia. The other
is the incontrovertible fact that Sonia's late husband Rajiv Gandhi's name
formally figures as an accused in the chargesheet. The Special Judge hearing
the Bofors case has pointed out the delay of three years before the FIR
was registered in January 1990 and that it was some more years before the
first chargesheet was filed in October 1999 keeping the name of Rajiv Gandhi,
now a dead person, in column 2 of the chargesheet. The Special Judge dealing
with the argument of the Hindujas, another accused, that the CBI chargesheet
should be quashed on the ground that there was inordinate delay in the
probe and trial, has observed that "there was a massive cover-up operation
at the government level so that the truth about the pay- offs/bribes is
not revealed." The role of Quattrocchi in delaying the trial is very well
known.
Undue influence
Those who are in the know of things
have reason to believe that Rajiv Gandhi was personally a clean person
who must have been pressured by his wife into allowing Quattrocchi into
the inner chambers of the Prime Minister's residence and wield undue influence
on the commercial deals of the public sector and even defence deals. Sonia
Gandhi has been, in the eyes of many, one of the main forces behind the
relatively innocent Rajiv Gandhi.
Well, if the case for Sonia Gandhi
as Prime Minister is made on the ground that she is the rightful inheritor
of Rajiv Gandhi's mantle and assets, should she not bear some responsibility
for the unedifying fact of her late husband figuring as an accused in column
2 of the Bofors chargesheet. Even if she cannot legally inherit that charge,
the assets she inherited and the stacked Congress party funds traceable
to this payoff do become attachable. Sonia Gnadhi needs to come out clean
on this if only to redeem the name of her late husband, who sought to be
the Mr. Clean in Indian politics.
V.K. SRINIVASAN
Former Special Chief Secretary,
Government of Andhra Pradesh.
