In a letter to Manmohan, CPI’s Gurudas Dasgupta suggested a three-member collegium to choose CEC and CAG
Prime Minister Manmohan Singh has said that there is no ‘urgent need’ to consider changes in the process of appointment of the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG), and the Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) and other Election Commissioners (ECs).
In a letter to Communist Party of India MP Gurudas Dasgupta, Dr. Singh maintained that the procedure for appointment to these constitutional posts had been in existence for a long period and was followed by the earlier governments.
Mr. Dasgupta had written to Dr. Singh suggesting that there should be a three-member collegium, comprising the Prime Minister, the Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha and the Chief Justice of India, to choose the CEC and the CAG.
Senior BJP leader L.K. Advani had suggested a five-member panel and Mr. Dasgupta consulted the leaders of the principal Opposition party before taking up the matter with the Prime Minister.
Dr. Singh, in his letter, said the government was open to changes in the process of appointment, resignation and removal of ECs, including the CEC, as part of electoral reforms. “I would like to point out that the procedure for appointment, resignation and removal of [the] Chief Election Commissioner and other Election Commissioners, as laid down by the government… has been in existence for a long period… Any change in the procedure… would require wide ranging discussions with other political parties. This, if necessary, can be taken up as a part of the agenda for electoral reforms.”
Dr. Singh contended that the CAG’s reports were examined by a parliamentary committee, which made recommendations to the executive for corrective action, if any. “The chairman of the Public Accounts Committee has traditionally been a member of the main Opposition party. In view of this, there does not seem to be any urgent need to set up a committee for appointment of CAG.”
SP takes exception
Meanwhile, the Opposition and the Samajwadi Party, which is supporting the UPA from outside, have taken serious exception to the statement of Minister of State in the Prime Minister’s Office V. Narayanasamy that the government might consider a multimember CAG.
In an interview to the Press Trust of India, Mr. Narayanasamy had talked about the Centre mulling over a proposal to make the CAG a multimember body. Mr. Swamy later claimed that he was misunderstood.
BJP chief spokesperson Ravi Shankar Prasad described Mr. Narayanasamy’s remark as a “disturbing attempt” to reduce the authority of the constitutional body and said any such move would be seriously opposed by the BJP. “BJP takes serious objection to this disturbing attempt by the government. We seriously apprehend that this remark of the Minister is not an off-the-cuff remark.” Faced with repeated exposures of scams by the supreme audit institution of the country, the government wanted to muzzle it, he said.
Mr. Prasad said the UPA government was embarrassed by the reports of the CAG that pointed out anomalies in 2G spectrum allocation, the Commonwealth Games, Coalgate and Delhi airport privatisation. “We would like to warn this government that any attempt to reduce the authority of the CAG and compromise the constitutional integrity of state institutions will be seriously opposed both inside and outside Parliament,” he said.
Samajwadi Party general secretary Mohan Singh said the talk of making the CAG a multimember body was either born out of ignorance or the government wanted to destroy the Constitution. “I condemn [Mr.] Narayanasamy’s remarks. People in responsible positions in government should avoid making comments against constitutional bodies. We will not support such a proposal under any condition. For the Election Commission, there is a provision in the Constitution to make it a multimember body. But in the case of [the] CAG, there is no such provision. You need to amend the Constitution for such a possibility and this government does not have the capability for doing so,” Mr. Singh said.
Slamming Mr. Narayanswamy, CPI national secretary D. Raja said: “The timing of this statement is questionable. It is also deplorable. The CAG has exposed a number of major scams which took place under the Congress-led UPA-II. It has done commendable work and everybody appreciates it.”
“This government is neck-deep in corruption. Several Ministers have been running down the CAG in the recent past. So these kinds of statements show that the intentions of the government are suspect,” he observed.
Distancing itself from the Minister’s comments, the Congress said the government would not act on the basis of the statements of one person.
Party spokesman Sandeep Dikshit told reporters that the CAG was the “companion” of the government. “I don’t think the government will take institutional measures based on the activities of a person,” he said. Mr. Dikshit said the Minister clarified that he was “misquoted and misunderstood.”
Mr. Dikshit added: “The CAG is a companion of the government. It is [a] part and parcel of the government. The CAG is not pain in the neck for anyone. It gives an opinion, right or wrong, which is sent to the Public Accounts Committee for consideration. Unfortunately, it has given some reports which give an impression that [something is wrong between the CAG and the government].”
“Right now, [the] Congress has no stand on the subject. The Constitution speaks of one CAG. The Shunglu Commission has given its report. Making the CAG a multimember body is a recommendation of the Committee. It is for the government to look into it or not,” he said.
Keywords: CAG revamp proposal, CAG selection process, Manmohan Singh, Gurudas Dasgupta, Shunglu report, Narayanasamy remark
The work load of the CAG has increased manifold - it is not a sin to increase its member-strength. The Centre is too week to say even the word consideration. But the CAG dares with sweeping unfounded remarks such as the CVC and CBI are not independent of executive and the CBI has become the handmaid of Govt. in power and lead public to construe without substantial instances, that the Govt. influences the CVC and the CBI. The CAG may be right in his plea to make CVC and CBI constitutional; but he shouldn’t act like a politician, a man of the opposition. Another haunting question is why CAG should wait for losses to mount for years in 2G, Coal block allocations, etc., and come up with appalling reports after a decade, without considering public welfare and timely audit to alert the Govt., which is more answerable to public. It is right time for the Govt. to consider strengthening CAG with more members to ensure periodical and timely audit. The CAG should also avoid controversial talks.
Yes.I agree with Dr.Manmohan Singh that there is no urgency to change the selection procedure for CAG but only in case of PM.
Immersed in corruption, Congress has become like a rudderless ship. It has totally lost touch with the grass root level people in rural areas and become insensitive to the sufferings of innocent poor on account of policy paralysis. To hide its face from all scams it comes up with all sorts of foolish ideas such as making CAG a multiple body but it will not succeed and the scams will become a snare to its feet in the coming election
The 3 member collegium can be considered for CBI director's board instead of CAG, as already there are strong allegation that the CBI is spineless in front of the ruling Government.
In a Republic, "We the People" are masters and the Executive,
Legislature, Judiciary are created to serve us. "We the People" also
have created some "Watch Dog" Authorities to keep check on the
Executive. Hence the "Executive" have no authority to change the setup
in 'CAG" without a specific and clear mandate from "We the People". In
the next election seek mandate from people on this aspect also.
So Mr Dikshit added "CAG gives an opinion, right or wrong". CAG does not give wrong opinion. His departments report / opinion is backed by audit enquiry and facts obtained independently during the audit.Mr Dikshit is Party's spokesperson who has no knowledge of how CAG compiles and give his / her report.
At the theoretical level of the first principles of the Constitution, it is difficult to see how a plural CAG will be unacceptable. Union Election Commission is a 3-member body which has come to command respect in India and abroad also. After all, a Constitutional amendment will be necessary if any changes are to be made in CAG and that cannot be a completely Congess party affair. But the stridency of chorus of protests and denials by all parties show that they are more influenced by the context of Narayana Swamy's statement than the merits of the case.This does not show the maturity of the politicians.
. “The chairman of the Public Accounts Committee has traditionally been a member
of the main Opposition party. In view of this, there does not seem to be any urgent
need to set up a committee for appointment of CAG.”
~ This is a circular argument, missing the point and ignores the much better
practices in the UK and the USA. As things stand today, CAG is PM's nominee.
Nothing can be worse than that.
'“I don’t think the government will take institutional measures based on the activities
of a person,”
~ This is a loaded statement, unwarranted as it is. Mr. Vinodh Rai had done no
objectionable activity.
Not a bad idea. 3 is more democratic. Lets have 3 speakers, 3 CMs, 3 PMs and 3 Presidents.
PM saying 'No urgent Need' means there is A NEED to tamper with the CAG
but that is not urgent.
the congress party seems to have developed some habits-
1. inflicting self-goals.
2. attempts of undermining constitutional bodies.
and in order to do so, it looks at only those recommendation which
suits it even if the same panel makes another recommendations which
makes the congress government stand in dock and this congress
government has a habit of neglecting such scathing recommendations.
for example, what happened to the suggestions by the same shunglu
panel on commonwealth games loot???? why not this government is
actively considering about those recommendations.
How about some procedures for removal of corrupt ministers rather than circle the CAG, EC and CEC in suspected politically motivated vernacular jugglery to disrepute them. And Mr. Dikshit are you serious - "Companion"? We thought politicians exposed by CAG and covering up each other for selfish interests are the only companions they have - themselves. Donn't try to malign the venerable CAG by dragging it down to your government's level, please.
Please Email the Editor