Mr Nitin Gadkari, President of the BJP, and Mr Naveen Jindal, Member of the Lok Sabha belonging to the Congress, are businessmen who have entered politics and have continued to be associated with decision-making relating to their business companies even while playing their political role.
Mrs Sonia Gandhi, President of the Congress, which is in power in the government of India, is the mother-in-law of Mr Robert Vadra, who has prospered in business after marrying Ms Priyanka Gandhi, daughter of Mrs Sonia Gandhi.
Mr Mitt Romney is a member of the US Republican Party belonging to a well-known business family of Massachusetts. He entered politics to become the Governor of his state. He is now contesting the US Presidential elections against President Barack Obama.
Mr Gadkari has got involved in a huge controversy because of his continued association with his business companies when he was the PWD minister in the Maharashtra Cabinet in the 1990s and now as the President of the BJP.
Mr Jindal has got involved in an embarrassing controversy because of his continued association with his steel business even while serving as a Member of the Parliament belonging to the Congress. He has allegedly benefitted from a coal mining block allotted to him by the Government of India.
There is nothing wrong in businessmen entering politics provided they do not profit in their businesses as a result of their political position and they do not allow their political role to influence their business decision-making. How to enforce political and business rectitude when businessmen take to politics?
It would be useful to make a case study of Mr Romney in the US. He was associated with some business companies of his state investing in and trading with China. One of the companies was allegedly even dealing with telecommunications which is a sensitive area from the national security point of view.
Before Mr Romney decided to enter politics and contest as Governor of his state, he made a public statement of all his business interests and holdings, formed a public trust in respect of each of his companies and dissociated himself from all decision-making in respect of these companies.
Those who had watched the second Presidential debate between Mr Romney and Mr Obama, would have noticed that Mr Obama questioned Mr Romney’s association with business companies investing in and trading with China. Mr Romney replied that the affairs of these companies are managed by a public trust and that he is not associated with their decision-making. Mr Obama was satisfied with his reply and did not pursue the matter.
In India, huge controversies have arisen relating to the business background of Mr Gadkari and Mr Jindal because they did not dissociate themselves from decision-making relating to their business companies while functioning as political leaders holding key positions. The public perception is and will be that they have benefitted in their businesses as a result of their political role and influence.
Mr Gadkari was a public servant when he was the PWD minister. He is not a public servant now as the President of the BJP. Mr Jindal is a public servant as a Member of the Parliament and is subject to the jurisdiction of the Prevention of Corruption Act. Had he been a member of the US Congress and had he been allotted a coal mining block, the legal and public assumption in the US would have been that he did not get the block on merits, but by virtue of his being in the Congress. To avoid such perceptions, all public servants in the US form public trusts of their businesses and dissociate themselves from decision-making.
In the case of Mrs Sonia Gandhi, the wrong-doing was of a different kind. When the Congress was elected to power in 2004, political rectitude demanded that she should inform all government departments of the government of India and all state governments where the Congress is in power, that her son-in-law is a real estate businessman and he should not be shown any favours because of his being her son-in-law. She did not do so.
When the controversy regarding the real estate wheeling and dealing of Mr Vadra recently broke out, she should have immediately written to the Prime Minister to look into all his real estate dealings in which departments of the government of India and state governments were involved and satisfy himself that there was no wrong-doing.
She did not do that either. Instead, allegedly at her prodding, a number of senior ministers of the cabinet of Dr Manmohan Singh holding sensitive portfolios embarked on a cover-up and damage control exercise to prevent any political embarrassment to her and to deny any criminal liability of Mr Vadra.
The controversies relating to Mr Gadkari, Mr Jindal and Mrs Sonia Gandhi call for follow-up action at two levels. An enquiry into all allegations made to rule out civil or criminal wrong-doing and introduction of conflict of interest provisions in our laws to enforce rectitude when businessmen want to enter public life.
B. Raman is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai, and Associate of the Chennai Centre For China Studies.
Very sage advice!
However - what was Mr. Raman and his learned colleagues doing while they were in service?
Is this all hindsight?!
Mr. Raman is right in demanding a complete enquiry into the business deals of Naveen Jindal, Shri Robert Vadra and Shri Nitin Gadkari. The Congress and BJP are adopting double standards. While the Congress leaders have rushed to the rescue of Shri Vadra and Shri Salman Khurshid, BJP leaders have spared no effort to defend their President Shri Gadkari.
Major news channels have done a good job in exposing true nature of business deals of Shri Vadra and of investments in BJP President’s business empire.
Even if the RSS has come to the rescue of Shri Gadkari, it cannot save him from further embarrassment as more damaging information is in public domain. Concerned citizens are of the opinion that (a) Shri Vadra’s dealings and growth of his wealth and (b) the source of money of companies who have made investments in Gadkari’s business call for a thorough probe. Hopefully, both Shri Robert Vadra and Shri Nitin Gadkari will be exposed in near future.
Gadkari was minister in 1995-99. The favors and finance he obtained is post 2005. Neither Indian businessmen are honest enough tio fulfill a commitment or reciprocate a favor 6-7 years down the line nor our politicians are willing to settle for a deferred quid pro quo. Theyt are smnart like Vadra who demand quid pro quo first before they touch the matter.
The accusations against Indias leaders are not imaginary.
The biggest failure in Indian democracy is not its politicians. It is its judiciary,
When corporate leaders are seen as corrupt, then corporations are seen as not desirable. When politicians who serve are seen as corrupt, people don't say anything about govt., until the political representative resigns, or is prosecuted. It seems, it is not good for a politician to resign, because people think the situation is not good, and will certainly get worse.
We at Outlookindia.com welcome feedback and your comments, including scathing criticism
1. Scathing, passionate, even angry critiques are welcome, but please do not indulge in abuse and invective. Our Primary concern is to keep the debate civil. We urge our users to try and express their disagreements without being disagreeable. Personal attacks are not welcome. No ad hominem please.
2. Please do not post the same message again and again in the same or different threads
3. Please keep your responses confined to the subject matter of the article you are responding to. Please note that our comments section is not a general free-for-all but for feedback to articles/blogs posted on the site
4. Our endeavour is to keep these forums unmoderated and unexpurgated. But if any of the above three conditions are violated, we reserve the right to delete any comment that we deem objectionable and also to withdraw posting privileges from the abuser. Please also note that hate-speech is punishable by law and in extreme circumstances, we may be forced to take legal action by tracing the IP addresses of the poster.
5. If someone is being abusive or personal, or generally being a troll or a flame-baiter, please do not descend to their level. The best response to such posters is to ignore them and send us a message at Mail AT outlookindia DOT com with the subject header COMPLAINT
6. Please do not copy and paste copyrighted material. If you do think that an article elsewhere has relevance to the point you wish to make, please only quote what is considered fair-use and provide a link to the article under question.
7. There is no particular outlookindia.com line on any subject. The views expressed in our opinion section are those of the author concerned and not that of all of outlookindia.com or all its authors.
8. Please also note that you are solely responsible for the comments posted by you on the site. The comments could be deleted or edited entirely at our discretion if we find them objectionable. However, the mere fact of their existence on our site does not mean that we necessarily approve of their contents. In short, the onus of responsibility for the comments remains solely with the authors thereof. Outlookindia.com or any of its group publications, may, however, retains the right to publish any of these comments, with or without editing, in any medium whatsoever. It is therefore in your own interest to be careful before posting.
9.Outlookindia.com is not responsible in any manner whatsoever for how any search engine -- such as Google, Bing etc -- caches or displays these comments. Please note that you are solely responsible for posting these comments and it is a privilege being granted to our registered users which can be withdrawn in case of abuse. To reiterate:
a. Comments once posted can only be deleted at the discretion of outlookindia.com
b. The comments reflect the views of the authors and not of outlookindia.com
c. outlookindia.com is not responsible in any manner whatsoever for the way search engines cache or display these comments
d. Please therefore take due caution before you post any comments as your words could potentially be used against you
10. We have an online thread for our comments policy:
You are welcome to post your suggestions here or in case you have a specific issue, to directly email us at Mail AT outlookindia DOT com with the subject header COMPLAINT