Bull's Eye

After prevaricating for four days, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh asked cabinet colleague Shibu Soren to resign because he was on the run dodging an arrest warrant. Soren retorted that if he was asked to resign, why should other chargesheeted ministers continue? The arrest drama has come to an end. The dispute remains. In Bangkok, the PM said criminality needs a precise definition. Does a minister become unacceptably tainted when probed, chargesheeted, arrested, has court charges framed against him, or is actually convicted by the court?

The PM said that a chargesheeted minister is not guilty unless convicted. Therefore, no resignation! In government, the BJP leaders propounded the same view. But both the PM and the BJP leaders said the minister should resign if arrested, even though not convicted. Soren retorted that an arrested minister should not resign, until he is convicted. Soren is more consistent. After all, if a chargesheeted person is made minister, there can always arise the possibility of his arrest in the course of an investigation. Then isn't it silly to appoint him in the first place?

Soren is also practical. If you do appoint a chargesheeted minister, retain him unless he is convicted. If he is arrested, surely he can function from jail. To facilitate functioning, the law can be suitably amended. Indeed, one might consider a legal provision to convert part of Parliament House into a prison. If that were to be done, arrested ministers and members would not inconvenience the nation by interrupting the functioning of government and Parliament.

Shibu Soren alleges that the BJP has masterminded his arrest warrant. But a court issues the arrest warrant. Does that mean that political parties running governments manipulate courts of law? Going by various statements made by dignitaries at various points of time, that does seem to be the popular perception.

The case against Soren is almost three decades old. In his affidavit prior to election, Soren had listed this as one of his cases. Then is the warrant spurious because the case is three decades old? A special fast-track court issued the arrest warrant. These fast-track courts were set up specifically to dispose of the large number of old cases clogging courts. Should these courts be scrapped? Under the present law, no minister can be investigated without government permission. Therefore, to allow a credible probe, a minister being investigated must resign. That is the unambiguous democratic convention. If followed, it would establish government's credibility. But it would also, alas, destroy government's stability!

(Puri can be reached at rajinderpuri2000@yahoo.com)