Prime Minister Under Siege

They met briefly in the Central Hall of Parliament to pay homage to Subhash Chandra Bose on his birth centenary on the morning of January 23. Prime Minister Narasimha Rao and Atal Behari Vajpayee parted with a "namaste". A couple of hours later, it was war. News agencies flashed Vajpayee's allegation that Rao had received Rs 3.5 crore from hawala operator S.K. Jain and that the CBI was trying to hush this up. The BJP veteran had drawn blood. The resignation of three of his ministers, V.C. Shukla, Madhavrao Scindia and Balram Jakhar, and Rao's insistence that "law will take its own course" have done nothing to erase the creases on the Prime Minister's forehead. With senior colleagues like Sitaram Kesri and Pranab Mukherjee also under a cloud and the Supreme Court taking a stern stand, Rao seems vulnerable and helpless—both politically and morally.

Already, almost all parties, with the honourable exception of the Left Front, are seeing their leaders' heads either chopped or awaiting the fall of the guillotine. The hawala money, going by what the Jains have told the CBI or entered in their seized diaries, does not have any political affiliation—whoever seeks it, finds it. The resignations reflect this across-party-lines syndrome: BJP president L.K. Advani, Janata Dal's leader in the Lok Sabha Sharad Yadav and three Union ministers. And JD chief S.R. Bommai's exit is inevitable—he is under pressure from his party as well its ally, the CPI(M).

The spate of resignations have also served to tighten the noose around Rao—the spotlight is now sharp-focused on the charges against him and his less-than-convincing attempts to deflect them. Moreover, an enfeebled Congress is no support base. Jain's oral statement to the CBI—where he claimed he paid off Rao through Chandraswami, Satish Sharma and R.K. Dhawan—has left the Prime Minister as vulnerable as anyone named in the diary. "Chan-draswami is being shielded because of his connections. Let action be taken against him. If not, the charges against Rao will get reinforced," says CPI(M) General Secretary H.K.S. Surjeet. "The case shouldn't be dismissed as one of poll funding. Severe action should be taken against all involved in bribery." There is also the question of the same hawala money financing anti-national activities, where the Government and its head automatically stand culpable.

For Rao, being cornered by the BJP on corruption charges is not a new thing. In June 1993, the 'briefcase' controversy had seen him in a similar spot. Advani, who had just taken over as the BJP chief, was out for his scalp. Rao had then calmly stonewalled the Big Bull's Rs 1 crore pay-off allegation, asserting that "the onus of proof rests on the BJP". The proof never came, and the hullabaloo died down. This time, in sharp contrast, there was an apparent panic in his response. He had a series of post-lunch meetings with key aides on January 23. And, without waiting for Vajpayee's allegations to get into print the next morning, the Principal Information Officer was told to issue a denial that afternoon itself. The clinching difference, of course, is that Vajpayee is no Harshad Mehta.

The BJP strategy is clear. First Advani resigned to protest the "frame-up" and vowed not to enter Parliament without an acquittal. Now the party intends to approach the SupremeCourt indirectly, seeking Rao's prosecution on the basis of Jain's statement. In effect, it wants to enlarge the scope of the public interest litigation before the court beyond the diary. That their moral high ground was a shaky one became evident when party leaders S L Patwa and Kailash Joshi admitted they had accepted money from the Jains. Delhi Chief Minister M.L. Khurana's refusal to step down further diluted the benefits gained from Advani's resignation. So there was reason for cheer when the CBI felt compelled to confirm Jain's claim that he paid Rs 3.5 crore to Rao in two instalments—one when he was the Congress chief in May 1991, the second after he became Prime Minister a month later.

In the BJP analysis, Harshad Mehta's and Jain's allegations are not identical. Mehta's affidavit could be seen as a ploy to derail the probe against him in the securities scam. Jain gave the statement while he was being grilled—if not tortured—by the CBI. "We will turn this to our advantage. This case might be a blessing," says BJP General Secretary K.N Govindacharya.

For all this, Rao's real cause of distress lies elsewhere. On January 24, the Congress Parliamentary Party's 22-member executive—a body of Rao's handpicked men—passed the obligatory resolution that the "party is solidly behind Rao". Nevertheless, it didn't quite appreciate the fact that the CBI had taken four years just to chargesheet some accused. The executive includes such worthies as AICC General Secretary Madhavsinh Solanki, who quit as the external affairs minister in April 1992 after his role in the Davos letter episode became public. With such feeble support, Rao is reluctant to summon a CWC meeting, as demanded by members like K. Karunakaran, Rajesh Pilot and Jakhar. Rao has asked every PCC to pass resolutions in his favour before such a meeting. "We're doing it, but with little enthusiasm," a top Rajasthan PCC functionary told Outlook.

Rao's strength derives from the "all are corrupt" scenario. Loyalists feel elated with the disclosure of Quattrocchi's role in brokering the Uri and Dulhasti power project deals in lieu of payoffs to Rajiv Gandhi. This is prime ammunition against the Sonia Gandhi camp.

"Rao must quit to allow a free probe. He can't divide and rule this time," says a CWC member. For Rao, the next Parliament session to pass the vote on account is another headache. Scindia and Jakhar—if not Shukla—are determined to make a statement. They feel the CBI, which runs under Rao, was "selective" in choosing its targets—a charge that may stick in court. In fact, the CBI had wanted to know whether a chargesheeted ex-minister had "prime ministerial ambitions". Says a PMO insider: "Sharma and Chandraswami had free access to the PMO. The procedure of ferrying visitors by PMO vehicles was dispensed for them. Obviously, they were dealing with money."

The omission of Sharma and the godman from the chargesheet gives credence to the charge that the CBI won't touch them unless the court orders it. And Rao's interest lies in buying time at least till the Parliament elections in April. But it may already be too late to launder his image and the natural law that a man is innocent till proven guilty may not necessarily guide the people's verdict. For, the charges are tumbling out too close to Judgement Day.