rediff.com
rediff.com
News
      HOME | NEWS | COLUMNISTS | INDIRA JAISING
October 31, 2000

NEWSLINKS
US EDITION
COLUMNISTS
DIARY
SPECIALS
INTERVIEWS
CAPITAL BUZZ
REDIFF POLL
DEAR REDIFF
THE STATES
ELECTIONS
ARCHIVES
SEARCH REDIFF

Rediff Shopping
Shop & gift from thousands of products!
  Books     Music    
  Apparel   Jewellery
  Flowers   More..     

Safe Shopping

 Search the Internet
          Tips

E-Mail this column to a friend
Indira Jaising

JMM case: Payoffs for all

The conviction of P V Narasimha Rao has left more questions unanswered than it has answered, the primary one being that the bribetakers have gone free. Indeed not only have they gone free, but Jharkhand Mukti Morcha leader Sibhu Soren is busy negotiating -- with threats to withdraw support to the NDA -- to become chief minister of the newly formed Jharkhand state.

He has nothing to recommend himself, apart from his credentials of being a leader of the tribal community. His party does not command a majority in the newly formed state. One would have thought his major disqualification would be the fact that the JMM MPs were the bribetakers in the Rao case. They accepted bribes to vote against a no-confidence motion in Parliament. Surely, public memory cannot be so short as to forget that a bribetaker is staking his claim to be chief minister.

And what can one say of the NDA, after all, with full knowledge of the fact that they were the bribetakers, the party was invited to be part of the ruling NDA. One is stuck with a situation where the bribing party is in the Opposition and the bribetakers are part of the ruling alliance.

So where do we go from here? Are we stuck with the Supreme Court judgment, which said by a majority that the bribegivers cannot be prosecuted because that would amount to the breach of privilege of Parliament? Is there no remedy under our Constitutional scheme for taking action against MPs who defile the sanctity of Parliament?

The very same Article 105 which talks of the privileges of Parliament, also talks of the powers of Parliament. And one of the most important powers of Parliament is the power to take action for the breach of privilege of Parliament. The Supreme Court ruled out the intervention of the courts against the bribetaker, but it did not rule out action by Parliament against the bribetakers. Under the Constitutional scheme, Parliament has enough powers to protect its own dignity and sanctity.

Powers and privileges have been conferred on Parliament precisely for that purpose, to enable it to function without fear or favour. It can compel disclosure, or non-disclosure and it has immunities. The function of these powers is to enable it to carry out its constitutional functions. It is, therefore, clear that Parliament can summon Sibhu Soren -- and his party members to disclose the transactions leading to the acceptance of the bribes -- try him, find him guilty and punish him with imprisonment.

Parliament, in exercising its powers and privileges, acts as a court as it does while dealing with the impeachment of judges. Parliaments and state assemblies have used these powers often. The power of contempt has been used against newspapers and against individuals often. There is no legal reason why it cannot be used in this extremely revolting situation, in which the bribegiver has been convicted and the bribetaker is in danger of going completely scot free for something as horrendous as taking money to cast a vote in Parliament. A greater perversion of Parliamentary democracy cannot be imagined.

So the reason why no action is being taken against the JMM MPs is not legal or constitutional, but purely political. The blame for this inaction cannot be placed on the doors on the Supreme Court. Indeed, the Supreme Court specifically kept the Parliamentary door wide open. The reason for the inaction is so obviously political. In that there is no difference between the Congress which gave the bribe to defeat a no-confidence motion and the NDA which took in the bribetakers as alliance partners to come to power and stay in power.

The nation has been taken for a ride. And while the NDA may rejoice in the conviction of P V Narasimha Rao, it has a lot to answer for failing to take the breach of privilege action against the JMM MPs. Now, it is all too evident that they will not. Not only are they negotiating the chief ministership with him, they need him to form the government. On the other side, R K Anand, Rao's lawyer, rewarded for his efforts with a seat in Parliament as a JMM MP, is threatening to form a government with the aid of the Congress and Laloo Prasad Yadav.

Everybody has got their payoffs, the nation has been taken for a ride, not by the Supreme Court, not by the Constitution, but by our politicians.

Indira Jaising is a senior Supreme Court lawyer.

Tell us what you think of this column
HOME | NEWS | CRICKET | MONEY | SPORTS | MOVIES | CHAT | BROADBAND | TRAVEL
ASTROLOGY | NEWSLINKS | BOOK SHOP | MUSIC SHOP | GIFT SHOP | HOTEL BOOKINGS
AIR/RAIL | WEDDING | ROMANCE | WEATHER | WOMEN | E-CARDS | EDUCATION
HOMEPAGES | FREE MESSENGER | FREE EMAIL | CONTESTS | FEEDBACK