The former Solicitor-General, Gopal Subramanium, has formally accepted the Delhi government’s offer to head the Commission of Inquiry to probe the alleged scam in the Delhi and District Cricket Association (DDCA).
Mr. Subramanium sent his letter of acceptance to Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal on Sunday.
Contrary to earlier stand
However, Mr. Subramanium’s acceptance marks a U-turn on his earlier stand that he would agree to head the commission only after the government sought the approval from the Lieutenant-Governor and the Union Home Ministry.
On December 24, Lieutenant-Governor Najeeb Jung > said in a communication to the Centre that since the Commission of Inquiry Act, 1952, empowers only the Centre and the State governments to appoint a commission of inquiry, Delhi could do so only with the concurrence of the Centre, through the Lieutenant-Governor, as it is a Union Territory.
Probe panel to televise proceedings
Mr. Subramanium while agreeing to accept the Delhi government’s offer to head the Commission of Inquiry to probe the alleged scam in the DDCA wrote that the Lieutenant-Governor’s ‘receipt’ of information from both the Cabinet and the House indicate that he “prima facie” has consented to the appointment of the commission.
“In any view, I have taken the opinion that in view of the express words of Article 239AA of the Constitution and in particular the Legislative Assembly being treated as a State legislature for the purposes of Article 324 to Article 326 and 329, I am left in no doubt that this is a State legislature for all practical purposes… It would also be contrary to the Constitution that a democratically elected body, which is empowered by the Constitution to deal with matters within the State list as well as the Concurrent list, subject to the limitations imposed by the Constitution, cannot set up a commission of inquiry.”
However, the government’s choice was questioned by the Opposition parties as Mr. Subramanium had in the past “helped” the AAP government in some cases. But the Delhi government said that so far, Mr. Subramanium had given legal opinion to the government on the issue of interpretation of Article 239 AA of the Constitution, pro-bono (free of cost). “In fact, he was among the five constitutional experts who had given their opinions on the subject,” an official statement said.
The government had accepted the request of Neelam Katara, mother of Nitish Katara, to appoint Mr. Subramanium as counsel for the State in the Supreme Court. “Apart from this, he has never engaged with the Delhi government.” Mr. Subramanium said that all the proceedings would be televised and made available in the public domain to make them transparent.
In a five-page letter to Mr. Kejriwal, he wrote: “I would also like to make it clear that I have already promised a public inquiry. The same should be held at a suitable place. I offer it to be televised because I would like anybody in the world to watch how the Commission is proceeding to deal with this matter… I have always believed that in many parts of the world where proceedings of courts have been televised, particularly in Britain and also in Canada, the judiciary has only stood to gain by being utterly transparent.”