Opinion - Editorials   

Wavering on political morality

The resignation of Union Minister of State for Overseas Indian Affairs Jagdish Tytler even if amidst protestations of innocence and with a great deal of reluctance is to be welcomed. The Nanavati Commission had come out with a finding that there was "credible evidence" that he "very probably" had a hand in organising the attacks during the 1984 riots that followed the assassination of Indira Gandhi and left 3000 Sikhs dead, and there could not have been a stronger indictment short of a criminal conviction. He ought not to have been allowed to continue in office the moment the findings became available, and the delayed response is of a piece with the Congress party's dithering on issues of political morality, a characteristic that was also in evidence during the recent crises in Jharkhand, Goa and Bihar. It is clear that Mr. Tytler and the Congress finally bowed to political pressure from the Left, from within the party itself and from other constituents of the United Progressive Alliance, for a response that was emphatic and more sensitive than the dismissive inaction of the Action Taken Report. The delayed resignation was not sound political strategy either. By seeming to act out of fear of the political consequences rather than out of a recognition of the moral imperative of not letting a tainted person continue in office, the Congress lost the opportunity to gain the moral high ground. At another level, that Mr. Tytler should hand his resignation to the Congress president, Sonia Gandhi, rather than to the Prime Minister demonstrates how constrained a prime minister would be in dropping any minister in a system where he has little say in party management. It is some consolation though that after all the political manoeuvring and the posturing the right thing has at last been done.

To launch criminal investigations and prosecutions on the basis of the Commission's report would be an imperative of the rule of law and ought not to be brushed aside as the politics of revenge. In Mr. Tytler's case, for instance, the ATR is dismissive of the finding that he "very probably" had a hand in instigating the attacks; but while this standard of evidence may not be enough to convict him, surely it warrants a serious investigation and prosecution that may result in a conviction. As in the Gujarat riots of 2002, here too the Nanavati Commission makes it clear that the attacks were not spontaneous but were organised, and that the attackers had some assurance of immunity from the police. This amounts to a serious indictment of the then ruling party and of the administration. It is a crying shame that after over two decades so little has been done, not just by the Congress governments that followed but by the Janata Dal, United Front and Bharatiya Janata Party governments as well, to prosecute those who organised the killer mobs and those who took part in the attacks. The Nanavati Commission's findings point the way to bringing them to book and the Government ought to follow them through with seriousness and commitment to justice.

Printer friendly page  
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Stories in this Section

Wavering on political morality
Medical negligence and prosecution
Moral indifference as the form of modern evil
"Identifying a civilian nuclear facility is India's decision"
Seeking multilateral regional cooperation
Incorrect reading of religious texts
Tourism falters in drug town
Tytler quits
Inconclusive findings

Copyright © 2005, The Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of The Hindu