It is almost two week since Indian Parliament had any business and the daily allowance of each Members of Parliament is Rs 2000. While the Opposition has been stalling the functioning of both Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha demanding Joint Parliamentary Probe into the 2G spectrum scam, the government seems to be in no mood to accede to the demand.
There have been four JPC probe in the past. The first was instituted to inquire into the Bofors contract on a motion moved by then defence minister K C Pant in the Lok Sabha on August 6, 1987. The Rajya Sabha endorsed it a week later. The committee, headed by B Shankaranand, held 50 sittings and gave its report on April 26, 1988. Opposition parties boycotted the committee on the ground that it was packed with Congress members. The JPC report was tabled in Parliament, but it was rejected by the Opposition.
The second investigative JPC, headed by former Union minister and senior Congress leader Ram Niwas Mirdha, was set up to probe Irregularities in Securities and Banking Transactions in the aftermath of the Harshad Mehta scandal. The motion was moved by then minister for parliamentary affairs Ghulam Nabi Azad in the Lok Sabha on August 6, 1992. The Rajya Sabha concurred with it the next day. The recommendations of the JPC were neither accepted in full nor implemented.
The third investigative JPC was assigned to probe the market scam. Then parliamentary affairs minister Pramod Mahajan piloted a motion in the Lok Sabha on April 26, 2001, to put it in place. Senior BJP member Lt Gen Prakash Mani Tripathi (retd) was named the chairman. The committee held 105 sittings and gave its report on December 19, 2002. The committee recommended sweeping changes in stock market regulations. However, many of these recommendations were diluted later.
The last JPC was set up in August 2003 to look into pesticide residues in soft drinks, fruit juice and other beverages and to set safety standards. The committee, headed by NCP chief Sharad Pawar, held 17 sittings and submitted its report to Parliament on February 4, 2004. The report confirmed that soft drinks did have pesticide residues and recommended stringent norms for drinking water.
Given this past record and the probe panel not having the power to punitively punish the guilty, should the Opposition continue with its demand of a JPC. The government and the Opposition should rather work together to make the investigating agency like the CBI more autonomous so that it does not comes under the pulls and pressures of the political class. Perhaps, this may be not to their interest. But should be done for the sake of the country.
While the Supreme Court is monitoring the progress of investigation, the government should appointment a bipartisan panel to recommend measures to ensure that corporate lobby group are not able to sway the decision making process. This is unlikely to happen as the moneybags of the corporate world swings in favour of those parties which sing along them.
What is needed is more transparency in the decision making process, with accountability. Perhaps we need Wikileaks and more whistleblowers. Tapegate is just the beginning. More is yet to come.
Saturday, December 4, 2010
Friday, December 3, 2010
Shocked by Wikileaks?
The cable leaks of Wikileaks has not come as a surprise. Nor are the dispatches of the US diplomats from various capitals. However, it provides an insight in the thought process of Washington and its priorities.
The reaction of US prior to the cablegate and after seems to follow a set pattern. First, they tried to cajole the home government of different countries that they should not take the cables seriously. Later, when the information was laid bare by the cables, Washington made an effort to reach out to strengthen their diplomatic relations.
The cablegate has some immediate fallout. First, the US would strengthen their diplomatic dispatches and make it more secure. Washington, which has been championing the cause of free speech, is now talking about taking action against Wikileaks. However, their reaction would certainly have been different if Wikileaks had put out the diplomatic dispatches of Russia or China.
Secondly, all the countries across the globe would be taking steps to make their diplomatic cables more coded and less transparent. The thin line which demarcates the role of diplomats and the intelligence agencies who man the embassies and high commission would further blur. There would be increasing cooperation between the two.
The question that needs to be asked is should action be taken against Wikileaks or similar forum which would come up in future. Should we not as the global citizens have the right to know what is going on behind the curtain, even if it is nasty.
Though internet has provided an opportunity for the free flow information. But, what is there in world wide web may not actually be true. But, does that matter. Every individual must have an access to different shades of opinion.
Government may try to hide their acts, in the name of national security and secrecy. But, what is national security or secrecy when the citizens of that country itself is not aware of the deeds of the state.
Cablegate is just the tip of the iceberg. Wikileak is just the beginning of the process. In the days to come, there would be many more such sites which would publish deeds and misdeeds of government and individuals.
What one is waiting for is the leak of information of bank account holders in tax havens like Swiss, Channel Islands.......
The reaction of US prior to the cablegate and after seems to follow a set pattern. First, they tried to cajole the home government of different countries that they should not take the cables seriously. Later, when the information was laid bare by the cables, Washington made an effort to reach out to strengthen their diplomatic relations.
The cablegate has some immediate fallout. First, the US would strengthen their diplomatic dispatches and make it more secure. Washington, which has been championing the cause of free speech, is now talking about taking action against Wikileaks. However, their reaction would certainly have been different if Wikileaks had put out the diplomatic dispatches of Russia or China.
Secondly, all the countries across the globe would be taking steps to make their diplomatic cables more coded and less transparent. The thin line which demarcates the role of diplomats and the intelligence agencies who man the embassies and high commission would further blur. There would be increasing cooperation between the two.
The question that needs to be asked is should action be taken against Wikileaks or similar forum which would come up in future. Should we not as the global citizens have the right to know what is going on behind the curtain, even if it is nasty.
Though internet has provided an opportunity for the free flow information. But, what is there in world wide web may not actually be true. But, does that matter. Every individual must have an access to different shades of opinion.
Government may try to hide their acts, in the name of national security and secrecy. But, what is national security or secrecy when the citizens of that country itself is not aware of the deeds of the state.
Cablegate is just the tip of the iceberg. Wikileak is just the beginning of the process. In the days to come, there would be many more such sites which would publish deeds and misdeeds of government and individuals.
What one is waiting for is the leak of information of bank account holders in tax havens like Swiss, Channel Islands.......
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)