Thursday, July 5, 2007

Not only anybody, even nobody can be President!

Not anybody, nobody too can be President
By Amba Charan Vashishth

Now that only two candidates – UPA-Left nominee Mrs. Pratibha Patil and NDA-supported independent incumbent Vice-President Mr. Bhairon Singh Shekhawat – are left in the fray for election to the office of the President of India and the nature of allegations that are surfacing each day against Mrs. Patil, the call of Mr. Sheikhawat to the electoral college consisting of MPs and MLAs that they should “vote according to their conscience” has become all the more topical and relevant.
The election, according to Mr. Shekhawat, is not “contested on a party symbol …..no whip can be issued” and “therefore there is no question of cross-voting” as the election is conducted through “a secret ballot”.
The Congress spokesperson, Mr. Abhishek Singhvi joined issue with Mr. Shekhawat and dismissed as “misapplied and inapposite” NDA’s plans to seek a conscience vote in favour of Vice-President Shekhawat in the presidential election as had happened in 1969. According to him, “1969 was a case when the ruling party was itself divided and conscience vote was sought because of the division.” To buttress his argument Shri Singhvi claimed that this time the ruling UPA “was completely united and all constituents had signed the nomination papers for Pratibha Patil”.
Perhaps, Mr. Singhvi is himself not aware of the fact – or he wishes deliberately to gloat over it – that in 1969 the late Mrs. Indira Gandhi, who had, later, called upon Congress MPs and MLAs to vote “according to their conscience” had, earlier, herself signed the nomination papers of the official Congress candidate, Mr. Neelam Sanjiva Reddy for the office of President. In these circumstances, Mr. Shekhawat’s call for a “conscience vote” is as much morally right -- or wrong -- as was then the call of Mrs. Indira Gandhi.
There remain two elements of similarity in the present Presidential election. At that time the person at the helm of affairs was Mrs. Indira Gandhi and this time it is her daughter-in-law. Then also, the choice of candidate by Mrs. Indira Gandhi was motivated, as it is today, not by merit or interests of the nation, but by personal ego, individual whim and self-interest. There was hardly anything against Mr. Reddy except Mrs. Gandhi’s personal dislike of him.
By coincidence, the individual for whom Mrs. Gandhi sought Congressmen’s “conscience vote” was the incumbent Vice-President, Mr. V. V. Giri.
By contrast, the independent candidate, Mr. Shekhawat, commands a stature, political standing, maturity, vast riches in experience and a much cleaner image than does his opponent possess.
On the contrary, Mrs. Pratibha Patil cannot be ranked as a model personality with an ideal image, given the kind of allegations that have been hurled against her own self and family. Unfortunately, the candidate herself has, so far, failed to come out with convincing rebuttal as concretely as are the allegations, except for dismissing these as “malicious, frivolous, unsubstantiated and politically motivated”. This is the stock claim and reaction of every politician accused of a crime. Mr. Shibboo Soren too claimed – and Mrs. Sonia Gandhi and Dr. Manmohan Singh support him as do they stand by other tainted ministers – himself ‘innocent’ till he was sentenced to life imprisonment on the charge of murder by a court of law.
Surprisingly, the UPA and the Left parties are vocal in defence as against the mute voice of the person accused of. It appears, as if these parties and leaders know more than does the person accused. They are taking the shelter that she cannot be held responsible for the conduct of her brother or husband going to be the “First Gentleman” if she gets elected.
While Mrs. Sonia Gandhi, from whom Mrs. Patil claims to draw inspiration, is proud of her Nehru-Gandhi family legacy, Mrs. Patil herself wishes, strangely, to wash her hands off of her own family legacy – that of her husband and brother disclaiming their acts of omission and commission. If she wins, will they -- or will they not -- join her in the Rashtrapati Bhawan? Nobody explains.
That our politicians are lacking in the moral courage is also explained by the fact that those who are claiming her or her family ‘innocent’ -- the way they argue in favour of the ‘tainted’ ministers as none of them has been convicted by a court of law, so far, – nobody has solemnly declared that she will quit Rashtrapati Bhawan if she herself, her husband or her brother were to be found guilty by a court of law.
Once in Rashtrapati Bhawan, the incumbent President cannot be proceeded against in any court of law. Neither can any law enforcing agency effect arrest as long as the person is sheltered in Rashtrapati Bhawan. In this way, is the UPA – and inversely, the nation -- not going to provide protection against law to a person who if not found guilty has also not been exonerated of a volley of charges she and her family is confronted today?
Let the UPA and the Left declare – if they are on so high a moral ground -- that her election will not turn the allegations against her own self, her husband and brother, into acts of virtue the moment she enters the Rashtrapati Bhawan! ***