Author: PTI
Publication: The Pioneer
Date: January 31, 2011
URL: http://www.dailypioneer.com/314411/CVC-selection-panel-discussed-case-against-Thomas-PC.html
The Selection Committee meeting to choose
Central Vigilance Commissioner in September last year did discuss the issue
of Palmolein case against P J Thomas, Home Minister P Chidambaram said today
but parried a question whether a "chargesheeted" person should have
been appointed.
Addressing a press conference, he was happy
to agree with the Leader of Opposition in Lok Sabha Sushma Swaraj that the
Committee discussed the issue of a pending case against Thomas before he was
named the CVC.
"We did discuss the names of the panel.
In fact, the bulk of the time (of discussion) was regarding P J Thomas and
Palmolein case. She (Swaraj) made her points, the other members (PM and HM)
of the Committee made their points.
"It was brought to the notice of the
Committee during the discussion that although the case was registered, no
sanction of prosecution was granted by the NDA government from December 1999
to May, 2004 and by the UPA government subsequently," Chidambaram said.
When the trial of the case was stayed by the
Supreme Court between 2007 and 2008, the Central Vigilance Commission had
held that no case was made against Thomas and Jiji Thompson, another IAS official.
Then Thomas was granted vigilance clearance (for appointment as Secretary
in the Government), he said.
"There could not have been a discussion
for several minutes without bringing these facts before the Committee. There
could not have been a disagreement without a discussion," the Home Minister
said.
Citing a statement of the Attorney General
that when the apex court had put a specific question whether papers and files
relating to the case against Thomas were "circulated" during the
meeting on September three, the AG had said "I had said the papers and
files were not circulated."
"It was never stated (by the AG) that
there was no discussion on the case against Thomas," Chidambaram said
quoting the Attorney General.
"I am happy to agree with the Leader
of Opposition that the matter was discussed," the Minister said.
When a questioner asked how the government
could have appointed a "corrupt" man facing a chargesheet to the
post of CVC, he shot back saying "I respect your right to hold a point
of view similarly you should also respect our point of view. The matter is
actively subjudice."
Chidambaram prefaced his reply to the question
on Thomas saying he was "reluctant" to answer it because the matter
was pending before the Supreme Court.
"I am very reluctant to answer the question
not because the question is wrong or I have no answer but because I was taught
and trained to respect the rule of sub judice.
"I am horrified that cases that are being
actively heard by the courts of law are being discussed widely by political
leaders and media. I am disappointed that the courts are not pulling up people.
I am answering (this question) reluctantly and with a great sense of disappointment,"
Chidambaram said.
Last week during a Supreme Court hearing,
the AG's statement that the material relating to Thomas' case was not placed
before the three-member Selection Committee headed by the Prime Minister had
created a controversy.
Swaraj had said the government was lying in
the apex court and that she would file an affidavit explaining her dissent
about Thomas in view of the case against him.