Our Lasting Shame-Of Scandals That Tell Us How Far We Have Slid

Ravindra Kumar-The Statesman-7th.May 2010

To believe in something and not to live it, is dishonest ~ Mahatma Gandhi.

IT must be galling for the Prime Minister to realise that, contrary to popular belief, it was two women ~ neither of them holding a Constitutional post ~ who decided policy in his Government until the other day. And if Dr Manmohan Singh subscribes to Gandhian values of integrity, it must be even more galling to realise that by the Mahatma’s lights, he may actually be a dishonest man.

When Gandhi said that “non-cooperation with evil is as much a duty as is cooperation with good”, he had sounded a note of caution for everyone in public life. As the head of a Congress-led government, Dr Singh is bound more by the Gandhian edict than others. And as a man who wears integrity on his sleeve the Prime Minister must by now be aware that he heads a government whose members ~ some of them at least ~ wallow in sleaze, subordinate national interest to commercial interests, and obtain private recompense for acts in the public domain.

By continuing to head this government, and to live with the corruption that is part of its basic structure, for nearly seven years now, Dr. Singh establishes one of two things ~ his complicity or his negligence. In either event, he cannot evade responsibility for the mess India finds itself in after the Nira Radia and IPL revelations, to name just two recent scandals.

Three aspects

There are at least three aspects to the Radia case, as disclosed in a section of the media and especially by the top secret report of the Director-General (Investigations) of the Income-Tax department reproduced in this newspaper that cause grave concern, especially when the report is read in light of facts that ought to be in the public domain.

First, that corporate India ~ the Tatas, the Ambanis, Unitech, Bharti Airtel ~ seems to be deeply involved in subverting public policy for private gain, possibly on a scale far bigger than in the past.

On 29 April, the Tata group issued a statement that said: “The Tata group has had a long and fruitful association with Vaishnavi Corporate Communications and its Chairperson Ms Nira Radia, which has added substantial value to the group's communications and public perception. All of Vaishnavi's interactions with the Government on behalf of the Tata group have been related to seeking a level playing field and equity in areas where vested interests have caused distortions or aberrations in policy. Further Vaishnavi's interactions with the Government on behalf of the Tata group, have, in keeping with Tata values, never involved payouts or seeking undue favors.”

In sharp contrast, the report of the DGI describes phone conversations that cover areas as diverse as (i) construction of a building in Chennai in association with a member of Mr M Karunanidhi’s family; (ii) a move to prevent the appointment of Mr. Dayanidhi Maran as Telecom minister; (iii) extension of a mining lease in Jharkhand through the Governor of the state, and (iv) “media and political environment management” for the Singur project in West Bengal. It is possible Ms Radia exceeded the brief given to her by the Tatas, but the investigation report clearly shows that she was not aiming to create either a “level playing field” or counter “distortions or aberrations in policy”, as the Tata group would have us believe.

A curious aspect of the Tata-Radia connection in West Bengal is that in the process of creating a so-called level playing field, the lobbyist managed not just to establish contacts with senior CPI-M leaders such as Nirupam Sen and Prakash Karat, but also took on as clients the West Bengal government, the West Bengal Industrial Development Corporation (both active players in the Singur affair) and the Information Technology department of the state government.

But possible conflict of interest ~ as between WBIDC and Tata Motors over Singur ~ appears not to have bothered any of the players, and certainly not Ms Radia. The D-G’s report highlights another conflict of interest that ought to be of interest to West Bengal.

The report describes Ms Radia’s efforts to assist Reliance in its bid to acquire Haldia Petrochemicals and the need to “handle” Purnendu Chatterjee, the promoter of the company. What the report does not tell us is that while one of her companies ~ Neosis Strategic Consultant ~ has Reliance as a client, another of her companies, Vaishnavi Corporate Communications, lists Haldia Petrochemicals among its clients. Or that several of her clients at one time ~ Haldia Petrochemicals, Government of West Bengal and WBIDC ~ have been locked in a dispute before the Supreme Court!

On behalf of Reliance, Ms Radia is alleged to have (i) attempted to foist people favourable to the company on the pipeline regulatory agency; (ii) attempted to contain damage that may be caused by an inquiry involving Rs 53,000 crore and asset stripping; (iii) deflect an RBI circular involving alleged lapses by RIL; (iv) lobbied the Finance ministry to ensure a 7-year tax holiday for Reliance Gas; (v) organized an NGO to file PILs against the Anil Ambani group, (vi) facilitated a special audit into rival Reliance Communications, and (vii) arranged control of a television channel, NewsX.

On behalf of Bharti, Ms Radia is alleged to have offered to help Mr Sunil Bharti Mittal to mend fences with the Telecom minister for a fee, using socialite, advertising man and occasional agony aunt, Suhel Seth, as a link.

On behalf of Unitech, Ms Radia is alleged to have managed policy changes to ensure a telecom licence to Unitech Wireless, handled and facilitated cross-border transfer of funds, arranged sale of equity in Unitech’s telecom venture, worked with the promoter to convince Government that no windfall gains had accrued to Unitech, and arranged “accommodation entries” under the guise of purchasing computer software to take out cash and suppress income.

Role of the media

THE second aspect of the Radia investigation is the role of the media, and one that the report only touches on. It says Ms. Radia’s “modus operandi also involve (sic) giving favours to journalists through giving expensive gifts such as cars, and holidays”. Did this really happen? If so, who were the beneficiaries? Were they from newspapers or television, or both? Clearly, they must have been in positions of influence to merit gifts of cars. While the investigation report is silent, perhaps it is necessary for every senior journalist and editor to make public the extent of his or her connection with Ms Radia, to ensure that all of us aren’t tarred with the brush of suspicion and innuendo. Let’s make it a point to read all signed columns and watch all hosted shows carefully.

The role of the media is important because the DGI’s report makes it clear that l’affaire Radia is not confined to telecom licences or to Mr A Raja. There are several other aspects to the matter ~ and they go to the core of corporate governance, of lobbying the Government, and of the manner in which news is reported. Readers and viewers would be entitled to ask if sections of the media aren’t being selective in confining their attention to the telecom mess, and to ask why there isn’t similar interest in the role played by big business in manipulating policy. Is it because these corporate entities are advertisers and because they are suspected to use their advertising budgets selectively?

A third ~ and critical ~ aspect of the Radia affair, indeed of all recent scandals, is that all of us ~ cutting across artificial divisions of party and ideology, profession and trade, persons public and private ~ seem to be touched by corruption, some by participating in it and others by acquiescing. When we gather on 15 August this year, at the Red Fort and elsewhere, let us mark the celebration of freedom by hanging our heads in shame. Let the Prime Minister be the first to do so. And when we do raise our heads, let it be with a resolve to be honest for at least that one day ~ and thus solve 1/365th of the problem. No doubt, we will be helped in our resolve by the fact that it is a public and government holiday!

The writer is Editor, The Statesman