"I Think There Was Political Interference"

What do you think of the Supreme Court's directive to the CBI to report developments in the hawala case directly to it, thus keeping it out of the Prime Minister's purview?

I think it is a very positive development. Keeping in mind the political nature of the investigations, it is only fair that the agency enjoys an autonomous status in the case. Particularly so, when Prime Minister P.V. Narasimha Rao has been named as one of the recipients of the hawala money.

Was there anything to suggest that there has been political interference in the proceedings of the CBI?

I think there was. Otherwise, the court would not have taken the view it did. Earlier too, there were cases of open political meddling in the investigations. The hawala case has just proved a point. In my opinion, keeping it out of the purview of the PMO would facilitate investigations.

What about charges that the CBI chief K. Vijaya Rama Rao is close to the Prime Minister? He has already got two extensions.

That might be true. But with the Supreme Court giving such clear-cut directives, personalities would cease to matter. It would be binding upon the investigative agency to report directly to the court.

Do you think it will make a difference, since technically the agency will still be under the control of the Personnel Ministry headed by the Prime Minister.

There is a difference between reporting to the court and taking orders from the Government, whose ministers the agency is trying to book. There must have been some unofficial communication even before the first chargesheets were filed in the hawalacase. Now the onus is upon it to directly report to the court.

Are you in favour of total autonomy for the CBI?

I have always advocated autonomy for the CBI. But that does not mean absolute independence, as no police organisation should be totally powerful. The National Police Commission had, in 1979, recommended a state security commission which would oversee the functions of police forces in the states. The proposed commission would have been headed by the home minister, a retired high court judge and MLAs from different political parties to balance the panel. In the case of the CBI too, a similar commission is required. Autonomy is essential and there can be no doubt that fearless investigation needs a total free hand. No one has any right to interfere with it.

But such changes warrant a constitutional amendment.

No constitutional amendment is required. Of course there will have to be changes in the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act of 1946, which basically governs the CBI.