August 28, 2002
The Bharatiya Janata Party regards
the statement issued by the Congress President, Mrs. Sonia Gandhi, regarding
the Electoral Reforms Ordinance is a text book illustration of political
hypocrisy. Mrs. Sonia Gandhi has said that the Congress Party has always
wanted to support the directions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court with regard
to the public disclosure relating to the criminal antecedents of each candidate
and the assets possessed by them. The consensus of the all Party meeting,
however, was in favour of disclosure of criminal antecedents of candidates
and a further provision requiring of elected candidates to declare their
assets.
When the case was argued before
the Supreme Court, Government of India and the Election Commission were
the parties before the Supreme Court. The only political party which intervened
before the Supreme Court was the Indian National Congress President Mrs.
Sonia Gandhi before the Supreme Court. Her stand is to mislead the people
of India and is wholly inconsistent with the stand that her Party took
before the Supreme Court.
The judgement of the Supreme Court
delivered on May 2, 2002 records the submissions of the Congress Party
as under:-
"Supplementing the aforesaid submission,
Mr. Ashwini Kumar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the India National
Congress Party submitted that the Constituent Assembly had discussed and
negatived requirement of educational qualification and possession of assets
to contest elections. For that purpose he referred to the debates of the
Constituent Assembly. He submitted that 3/4th of the population is illiterate
and providing education as a qualification for contesting election was
not accepted by the Constituent Assembly. Similarly, prescribing property
qualification for candidates for contesting election was also negatived
by the Constituent Assembly. He, therefore, submitted that furnishing of
information regarding assets and educational qualification of a candidate
is not at all relevant for contesting election and even for casting votes...
It is his say that the Party who he represents is interested in purity
of election and wants to stop entry of criminals in polities or its criminalisation
but it for the Parliament to decide the said question. It is submitted
that delicate balance is required to be maintained with regard to the jurisdiction
of Parliament and the Courts and once Parliament has not amended the Act
or the rules despite the recommendation made by the Law Commission or the
report submitted by the Vohra Committee, there was no question of giving
any direction by the High Court to the Election Commission.
Not only this, the Congress further
submitted before the Supreme Court " Mr. Ashwini Kumar, learned Counsel
appearing on behalf of the intervenor submitted that the aforesaid observations
are with regard to citizens right to know about the affairs of the Government,
but this would not mean that citizens have a right to know the personal
affairs of MPs or MLAs."
2. Not only this, when the Law Ministry
prepared a draft Legislation which provided for disqualification for contesting
election if charges were framed against the said person in two heinous
offences, the Congress Party chose to vehemently oppose this proposal of
the Law Ministry. So much for its commitment for criminalisation.
After the all Party meeting and
the consensus arrived at all Party meeting, the Government has come out
with the Ordinance which seeks to become law. The contents of both the
Ordinance and the consensus were known to the Congress Party all these
weeks and yet it has chosen to speak out only after the event. The statement
of Mrs. Sonia Gandhi is a clear after thought that is wholly inconsistent
with the utterances of the Party - a typical example of political hypocrisy.
