In Indian politics, accusations often fly thick and fast, shaping public discourse and perceptions. One particularly persistent allegation levelled against the ruling party is the notion that individuals associated with it are granted immunity from legal scrutiny, insinuating that joining the party is a means to exoneration. However, such claims are baseless and threaten the integrity of India’s legal system and democratic principles. This article aims to contest these allegations by highlighting the robustness of India’s legal framework and providing factual evidence regarding the operations of investigative agencies like the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) and the Enforcement Directorate (ED).
The CBI, often under scrutiny for alleged political bias, operates within a framework of independence and impartiality. According to official data, a small fraction of the agency’s workload pertains to political figures. Over the last 11 years, out of 10,622 preliminary inquiries and regular cases, only a handful have involved politicians. This statistic, representing approximately 1/1.5 per cent of the total cases, undermines the claim of a politically motivated modus operandi.
Moreover, many high-profile cases involving politicians were not self-initiated but were entrusted to the CBI by constitutional courts. The agency operates within the constraints of international cooperation, judicial stays, and the technical nature of evidence, which may extend investigations over prolonged periods. This reality highlights the agency’s dedication to diligence rather than political motivations.
Similarly, the ED, tasked with combating economic crimes, operates with a commitment to upholding the law. Despite accusations of selective or politically driven investigations, official data paints a different picture. Out of almost 6,260 Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) cases, only 149 pertain to politicians, representing a mere 2.3 per cent. Notably, investigations into these cases have led to the identification and attachment of proceeds of crime worth over Rs 27,000 crore.
Investigations by the ED also extend to high-profile bureaucrats, resulting in the identification and attachment of proceeds worth over Rs 16,000 crore. These figures underscore the agency’s dedication to impartiality and effectiveness in combating economic offences, irrespective of political affiliations.
The data provided by both the CBI and the ED debunks the myth of political bias in the working of these investigative agencies. These agencies operate within the framework of the law and are guided by the principles of impartiality and accountability. Accusations of political interference not only undermine the credibility of these agencies but also cast aspersions on the integrity of India’s legal system.
Critics of the judiciary, a pillar of democracy, have also been unfair. Such criticisms, regardless of the intentions behind them, do not align with the aspiration to propel India towards greater prosperity and well-being. The judiciary – given its role to safeguard the rule of law and uphold justice — is fundamental to our democratic fabric. While constructive criticism is essential for progress, unwarranted attacks on the judiciary undermine its independence and integrity. Those truly committed to India’s advancement recognise the importance of respecting the judiciary, ensuring that justice prevails for all and the nation’s sovereignty remains unshaken.
Questioning the nation’s sovereignty in pursuit of narrow political agendas is not only irresponsible but also detrimental to the unity and integrity of the nation. India’s sovereignty is sacrosanct, safeguarded by the collective will of its citizens and enshrined in the Constitution. To dispute this sovereignty in pursuit of partisan gains is a disservice to the democratic principles on which the nation stands.
Individuals’ decisions to join political parties stem from a variety of factors, distinct from any pending criminal cases they may have. Ideological alignment, aspirations for change and disillusionment with current political affiliations often serve as primary motivators. While legal matters can influence public perception and political viability, they rarely serve as the sole determinant for joining or leaving a party. People’s political choices are nuanced and multifaceted, shaped by personal values, socioeconomic considerations and perceptions of party integrity and effectiveness. Therefore, attributing party affiliations solely to pending criminal cases overlooks the intricate interplay of individual motivations and the broader sociopolitical landscape.
One such example of an individual changing political parties due to a perceived lack of vision and direction in their former political party, and not because of any criminal case, is this writer. He was attracted to the party to which he was formerly affiliated because of its purported ideals and promises for societal progress. However, as time passed, this writer grew increasingly disillusioned with the party’s leadership and its inability to articulate a coherent vision for the future. This transition was driven solely by his desire to align with a political platform that offered clearer direction and better-reflected values and aspirations. This example underscores the importance of visionary leadership and ideological inclinations in shaping political affiliations, distinct from any legal considerations.
Allegations against the ruling party and investigative agencies must be evaluated on facts and evidence. The data provided by the CBI and the ED paints a picture of agencies dedicated to upholding the law, irrespective of political affiliations. Accusations of political bias undermine the integrity of India’s legal system and democratic principles and pose a threat to the fabric of democracy. All stakeholders must uphold the sanctity of India’s democratic institutions and work towards the common good of the nation, without succumbing to divisive rhetoric or political opportunism.
The writer is professor of finance, Xavier School of Management, Jamshedpur.
He joined BJP from Congress in the first week of April
The CBI, often under scrutiny for alleged political bias, operates within a framework of independence and impartiality
13
1
23.04.2024
In Indian politics, accusations often fly thick and fast, shaping public discourse and perceptions. One particularly persistent allegation levelled against the ruling party is the notion that individuals associated with it are granted immunity from legal scrutiny, insinuating that joining the party is a means to exoneration. However, such claims are baseless and threaten the integrity of India’s legal system and democratic principles. This article aims to contest these allegations by highlighting the robustness of India’s legal framework and providing factual evidence regarding the operations of investigative agencies like the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) and the Enforcement Directorate (ED).
The CBI, often under scrutiny for alleged political bias, operates within a framework of independence and impartiality. According to official data, a small fraction of the agency’s workload pertains to political figures. Over the last 11 years, out of 10,622 preliminary inquiries and regular cases, only a handful have involved politicians. This statistic, representing approximately 1/1.5 per cent of the total cases, undermines the claim of a politically motivated modus operandi.
Moreover, many high-profile cases involving politicians were not self-initiated but were entrusted to the CBI by constitutional courts. The agency operates within the constraints of international cooperation, judicial stays, and the technical nature of evidence, which may extend investigations over prolonged periods. This reality highlights the agency’s dedication to........
© Indian Express
visit website
login
who are we?
contact us
qosheapp
Toi Staff
Gideon Levy
Belen Fernandez
Rami G Khouri
Mort Laitner
Donald Low
Ali Fathollah-Nejad
