 |
||
|
||
|
||
Tirunellai Narayanaiyer Seshan ruled India's rulers with an iron fist using his
constitutional authority as chief election commissioner. After retirement,
Al-Seshan, as he was nicknamed for his watchdog tactics as election chief, now
wants to do the real thing - he wants to be the President of India: if not, the
prune ministership is good enough. Reason: the country is going to the dogs.
Seshan's dogged pursuit of this dream uses in ample evidence recently when he
announced his decision to contest the forthcoming presidential election. He
claims that most parties will support him.
The former bureaucrat, who was a terror to the shrewdest politician has already
sent shivers down the spines of corrupt politicians by his announcement. The man
who cannot remain in the shadows anymore as the people "need" him granted Jay
Mazoomdaar a freewheeling interview in which he dwelt on his patriotism and the
need to attack corruption, streamline the system, and usher in value-based
governance. Excerpts..
T N Seshan has mellowed a lot. Why?
I was always a mellow person maybe with a deceptive exterior. Now, I have removed
that jacket.
So, why are you aiming for the presidency?
I am worried that the integrity of the country is at stake. Certain arrangements
were working so long. We had single-party monopoly at the Centre and most of the
states. That's no longer true. Today, we are assuming a federal structure with
coalition governments at the Centre and many regional parties in the states.
The president today, therefore, occupies a very important position. That does not
mean the president has to go beyond constitutional provisions, but with all these
conflicting and co-operating parties in the states and the Centre, he will have to
assume a more significant role in the coming years.
Therefore, it's my conviction that some former party person is not the right
candidate for the presidentship anymore. I wish there were some outstanding
non-party person other than I. But, frankly, I cannot see, anybody.
I have lived in government for 36 years. I have a fair degree of knowledge how
this system works. So I thought I could contribute by assuming the highest
office.
You were out In the cold following retirement. There was no hint....
When I retired in December. I almost made up my mind to disappear - maybe in
social service. But then I received heaps and heaps of letters asking me not to
give up. I am not using the term heaps in exaggeration.
Well, I had a larger-than-life image, and, no doubt, you media people were mostly
responsible for that. Sometimes you wrote bad about me and sometimes good. But
what mattered was that you always wrote about me. Now, even in a small village,
you will find people who know me. Ask a taxi driver, he also probably knows me.
So that's where I stand, and that's why....
But you could have well served these people In some other field?
As an MP or a minister, I would have been available only to a small area of
service. But the country needs me in a greater role to attack corruption, to
safeguard the structure of the executive, the judiciary, and the media. It may
sound like a joke, but I cannot think outside two posts - one is of the president
and the other of the prime minister.
You have repeatedly said that nothing concrete will come up unless you have proper
authority. In the Election Commission too, you were often unhappy about your lack
of autonomy. So why hanker after a post which ultimately stands for symbolic
authority?
The forefathers of the country had given the president a role, just as they had
given the EC a role. I don't agree with the term "symbolic power". In an
appropriate time and place, the president has certain roles to play which are not
merely symbolic. In the day-to-day administration, he has no role. But when the
chips are down, and he has to decide which party he should call to assume office,
and in certain constitutional matters, he is definitely the pivotal factor'.
Do you think an Individual at the top post can redefine the president's functional
domain within the constitutional limitations, making it more assertive and
utilitarian?
What do you think happened in the CEC's office? I was not given a single new law,
but you saw the improvement. Sitting within the confines of law and the
Constitution, the president can act for the benefit of the nation.
Look, every position has its own inherent power and abilities. You act on them at
the right time and right place. You enhance the job as you enhance the safety of
your vehicle. And as the same vehicle doesn't perform alike under different
drivers, the handling of the machines, your expertise with the machinery - all
these count. My insight into the system as an administrator is my greatest plus
point. Not an inch outside.
As you have yourself said, Prime Minister Seshan would naturally be a more
effective constitutional factor, if you really mean business. When you want to
"take forward" your "reformist agenda" against corruption and criminalization, why
don't you join "real politics"?
That is definitely the other alternative. After I retired in December, the first
opportunity that has come is to try for the presidency.
If I don't succeed in becoming president, I will join politics.
Corruption is everywhere... but more In politics: how then do you expect to fit
in?
It's exactly when the disease is [at its] worst that you want the strongest
medicine. And I believe I am the best remedy.
But after the way you cracked the whip as CEC, do you really think any of the
parties will support you?
I have met Sitaram Kesri, Sharad Pawar, Rajesh Pilot, L K Advani, Atal Behari
Vajpayee, Murli Manohar Joshi, Sikander Bakht, and Sharad Yadav. I will meet
Laloo Prasad Yadav in Patna. Prime Minister I K Gujral is busy with his duties,
but I am sure he will see me soon. I have met Jyoti Basu and Sitaram Yechuri. I
also went to see Harkishen Singh Surjeet when he was unwell. I will go again. I
also met Somnath Chatterjee, Indrajit Gupta, A B Bardhan, D Raja [of the Communist
Party of India], Mulayam Singh Yadav, Kanshi Ram, G K Moopanar. P Chidambaram,
and Farooq Abdullah. Their uniform reaction has been that "we know You are a very
capable chap. Our conflicts when you were CEC apart, we have no ill-will against
you. What my group will decide I cannot tell. We will sit together in the party
and decide for it."
But this involves a multi-party number game. What Is your equation for drawing
support? Do you stand a chance when all political Parties will have their formal
candidates?
I have gone into its arithmetic. Today, no single party or group can force its own
candidate. If I can have support from one group and several factions of other
parties, I will sail through.
There, I have three strong points in my favour. For the presidential Poll, it
will be Illegal for a party to impose any whip as the rules for the presidential
election state that the Supreme Court can stay the election in case of any undue
influence. And the Indian Penal Code defines undue influence as any directive from
any person affecting one's self-judgement.
Secondly, even if there is a whip, one cannot detect - as is possible in the House
- whether the members have obeyed it or not. Thirdly, even if one is caught, one,
cannot be Penalized under the rules. Voting for a presidential election is not
"voting in the House" for which one can be punished.
So I have all the reasons to be optimistic though none of the three fronts has
assured me of formal support as yet.
Zail Singh stopped an angry Rajiv Gandhi in his tracks during his presidency. Do
you intend to, like Zail Singh, shed the rubber-stamp image if you are elected?
Why only Zail Singh, when H D Deve Gowda forwarded his nomination for the Rajya
Sabha, the president turned it down.
Within the system, you can either be a social force collecting everybody, or you
assume a driving seat and act from there. If this does not work, the other option
is always open for me.
What has been the response of the BJP, the party for which you are said to have a
soft corner?
Anybody can brand me as anything. I was never with any particular party or group.
None of my decisions as CEC was biased.
What about the post-Seshan era of the EC?
I won't comment on that. Mr [Manohar Singh] Gill is a very capable person. I
wish him all the best.
But are you happy with the way things are taking shape, with the EC going In for a
thorough overhaul of the system?
I will stress on four conditions, failing which elections cannot be successful in
any country. First, the law must be very good. Secondly, the EC must have full
autonomy. Thirdly, the administrative arrangement must be total. Finally and most
importantly, the voter should be aware.
In my six years, unfortunately, there was hardly any improvement in the laws. The
governments didn't fully co-operate. I have stretched the EC's autonomy to a
considerable extent. I would have succeeded further if [P -V Narasimha] Rao was
more co-operative.
The EC till the other day was treated as a chaprasi of the government: it just
used to follow instructions. That has changed. I would say I have achieved good
success. For, we have appointed observers, we have ensured that the chief
electoral officers are not pulled around or transferred by the state governments.
I don't think the country ever saw the code of conduct so well imposed as it was
in the last two or three years.
But my greatest success was in increasing voter awareness. The success in the
literacy drive, the role played by both the print and the visual media - all
contributed to this success.
It is said that the video cassettes made during the elections have not been
scrutinized. Nor have the reports of the observers been gone through. How then
can the EC continue to justify such expenditure?
Who told you? Of course, we didn't scrutinize all the reports or cassettes. A
police officer in his beat doesn't cheek everything - he only looks to troublesome
elements. We also checked wherever there were complaints. As for expenditure, you
have to be prepared for realizing an effective system.
The I-card drive seems to have run Into a brick wall. Why?
Narasimha Rao will remain responsible for that. Deliberately - I would say
mischievously, without any apparent reason - he opposed the card drive.
What about the open defiance by the Congress of the EC's dictates on inner-party
democracy? Can the EC derecognize the party or freeze its symbol?
I won't comment on the wisdom of giving 14 more days to the Congress. When in
1994 George Fernandes came out of the Janata Dal, I issued a similar notice.
Parties must follow their own rules. In 1996, when N D Tiwari went out, I said
the hand symbol should be frozen unless they conduct timely elections. By that
time, the commission became a team and I was overruled by the other two gentlemen.
I still think my judgement was right.
>From December they have come to May, only to be flouted again. Finally, they
agreed on 15 June. Frankly, the EC should not intervene in any party's internal
affairs. But unless a party works according to its own constitution, the whole
edifice becomes a nominated tamasha.
Would you say the EC is soft on the Shiv Sena as It is not binding on the party to
hold organizational polls? Shouldn't there be uniformity?
There should be a basic uniformity in principles in all these party constitutions.
But as for the Shiv Sena, I must say Parliament has not given the EC - in section
29A of the Representation of the Peoples Act - any power to scrutinize a party's
constitution. It only says that the party has to swear by the nation's integrity
etc etc. It does not authorize the EC to enforce inner-party democracy. If it is
required, the Constitution must be amended. Otherwise, you cannot blame the EC.
The Janata Dal president had a very strange relationship with you as the CEC....
I only remember, with great satisfaction, despite everything that transpired
between us, that Laloo Prasad Yadav rang me up after the 1995 election and said,
"Mr Seshan, I have won the vote for you. After 40 years, you have enabled the
most backward Dalits in the state to lay their hands on the ballot papers." That
was a great feeling, when you can actually help the poorest of the poor to
exercise their electoral rights.
Any more books, after Intimate Story, in the offing?
Not now.
You said in a recent Interview on the Net that the IAS is junk, journalism Is
junk, everything is junk....
No, I didn't use the term "junk". An I said was "deterioration is everywhere".
Then how do you expect support from such a corrupt system?
I still have great faith in the patriots.
When you join politics, which brand of it will you prefer?
It is too early now to discuss such things.
Broadly, my preference is for patriotic politics - which is good for the country.
I may join any existing party. I may also form a new party. All probabilities are
there.
How could you arrange a costly conference-cum-meal for scribes recently?
I have never believed in under-the-table dealings. All I spent was about Rs
13,000. About Rs 6,500 for a shamiana, Rs 3,500 for food, and the rest for other
arrangements. And, for your information, I have made all the payments by cheque.
|
||
|
||
|
||