Sunday, August 2, 2009

CBI AND POLITICIANS

THE CBI AND THE POLITICIANS

The CBI arrests Buta Singh’s son and father’s immediate reaction is: "this is a conspiracy to malign my political and personal life." Whenever a politician or his close relation is arrested in a criminal case, it invariably becomes a false case. Two other incidents from the recent past immediately come to mind. When the CBI charge-sheeted the CPI-M leader Pinarayi Vijayan in a graft case, the CPI-M General Secretary Prakash Karat said his party was united in its stand that the corruption case against former minister was "politically-motivated” The other is the murder case in which the CBI arrested the NCP MP Padam Singh Patil for his alleged involvement in the crime Once again, we heard similar comments. The MP said he had been framed and it was a "malicious political campaign to malign my image." Such allegations have been made by other politicians too in the past.

Every police officer knows that no accused in criminal cases ordinarily admits to his or her involvement in crime. They all claim to be innocent. But the politicians do not merely proclaim their innocence; they impute motives. The idea is to convince the public that they are blameless, but even then they are being harassed for political reasons. How do the politicians dare to do so and hope to get away with tarnishing the image of the premier investigating agency of the country?

The problem is that over a period of time, the CBI’s image has been very badly dented. The public of course do not hold the politicians in this country in high esteem; but their image of the police is equally poor. There is a general public perception that the CBI, like other police forces in the country, is influenced in its work by political considerations. The crooked politicians take advantage of this public perception. Even where action taken against them is perfectly legitimate and is as per the law, they invariably pose as victims of political vendetta and witch hunting.

The purpose of this briefing is to highlight the need to make the CBI a highly professional organization and not to plead for the politicians. For this purpose, facts must be recognised.

Regrettably, the public perception about the CBI becoming highly politicized is based on facts. In some cases against ruling party politicians, the CBI has shown either reluctance to take up investigation or when forced to do so, adopted dilatory tactics. It has also shown considerably uncharacteristic zeal in pursuing cases against politicians in opposition and has sometimes been shamelessly brazen in shifting its stand depending on the accused’s equation with the party in power.

It is not only the politicians who have questioned the functioning of the CBI; even the judiciary has often lambasted it for its inept investigations, particularly its biased handling of cases involving politicians in power. In the Havala case, the Supreme Court pulled up the CBI for showing “inertia” to investigate offences involving influential persons. More recently, the apex Court slammed the organisation for its complete turn around from its earlier stance in the disproportionate assets case against the former Uttar Pradesh chief minister Mulayam Singh. The CBI’s u-turn in the Quattrocchi’s case too earned it considerable criticism. Earlier, the Delhi High Court while acquitting Hinduja brothers in the Bofors case, called the trial a waste of public money (2.5 billion rupees) and time (14 years) and a "disaster" for accused persons. Mr V.P.Singh, the former Prime Minister, observed at that time that the CBI had never been successful in any high profile corruption case and demanded a JPC probe into CBI’s lapses.

The CBI, like all police forces, in the country is always open to undesirable illegitimate influences from its political masters. The Supreme Court’s judgement in the Havala case failed to provide it the type of insulation it required. Till now, the central government has been able to shirk its responsibility to insulate the police forces from illegitimate pressures by passing on the buck to the state governments on the ground the Police is a state subject. The CBI is a central police organisation and it is the central government’s responsibility to make it professionally strong and impartial. Lamentably enough, it has taken no steps in this direction.

The CBI was established on 1.4.1963 but till date no law has been enacted to govern its functioning. It is still being governed by an outdated Act of Second World War vintage, called the Delhi Police Establishment Act, which was enacted in 1946 to regulate the functioning of the Special Police Establishment set up in 1941 On occasions, the central government has, in fact, issued orders scuttling the powers of the CBI, making it dependent on the government even in conducting its operations. The Single Directive issued during Rajeev Gandhi’s days, prohibiting the CBI to inquire into cases against officers of the rank of Joint Secretary and above without departmental permission, is one such order. In the Havala case, the Supreme Court struck down the Directive as illegal, but the Government of India brought it back by including it in the Central Vigilance Commission Act of 2003. What was earlier a set of executive instructions has now become a part of law.

The government must realise the need to depoliticise the CBI and other police forces in the country. A professionally strong and impartial functioning of the police forces is important from the internal security point of view. A politicised police force ultimately becomes cowardly and selfish in its approach, corrupt and brutal in its dealings and ineffective in its operations.