| In July last year, there was an arrest warrant for Shibu Soren in a 30-year old case involving the murder of 11 people. He was then the coal minister. He had applied for bail, but his associates believed that an "unfriendly" state government ensured that his bail application did not get heard till he was forced to quit the central government. Manmohan Singh played by the rule book and forced Shibu Soren to quit. It was a decision for which the Prime Minister was complimented, even though Shibu Soren's ministerial colleagues described the charges levelled against the Jharkhand leader as "politically motivated". |
| Jagdish Tytler was named by the Nanavati Commission that probed the anti-Sikh riots in Delhi in 1984. The Commission stated that there was "credible evidence" that Mr Tytler "very probably" had a hand in organising attacks against the Sikhs. The Action Taken Report of the Manmohan Singh government had given a clean chit to all those who had been named and took a view that no further action required to be taken. But there was a massive political uproar over the government's inaction. The Prime Minister had to step in and declare that cases against the guilty would be reopened. And he made sure that Jagdish Tytler, who was then a cabinet minister in charge of overseas Indians' affairs, sent in his resignation letter. |
| Now, consider what happened to K Natwar Singh. His name figured as one of the non-contractual beneficiaries in the report by Paul Volcker examining the irregularities committed by the Saddam Hussein regime in Iraq while administering the UN-endorsed oil-for-food programme. K Natwar Singh should have quit the government, if Manmohan Singh had enforced the same rule that was used in the cases of Shibu Soren and Jagdish Tytler. That he did not showed that he was a little different from Mr Soren and Mr Tytler. |
| To be fair to Dr Singh, he made sincere efforts to persuade his foreign minister to step down. But he failed. So a compromise formula was worked out to retain him in the council of ministers without any ministry. Kamlapati Tripathi in Indira Gandhi's cabinet and Mamata Banerjee in Vajpayee's cabinet are the two other names who also enjoyed the fruits of a cabinet berth without carrying the responsibility of running a ministry. Tripathi got his ministership without portfolio because Indira Gandhi did not want to give him any ministry and yet create the impression of rewarding him to keep him happy because of his seniority. Ms Banerjee was kept waiting for a portfolio of her choice for months because she made too much fuss about getting the ministry of her choice and nothing else. Eventually, she got the ministry of coal and mines. |
| Why has Natwar Singh been retained as a minister without any portfolio? Is Manmohan Singh going to treat him as Indira Gandhi treated Tripathi? Or dump him after keeping him waiting for his coveted portfolio? Congress apologists don't want to look at it in this way and reiterate their argument that it is not fair to compare Natwar Singh's alleged acts of impropriety with the charges of murder and rioting against a minority community levelled against Mr Soren and Mr Tytler, respectively. You cannot have the same treatment for two different kinds of crimes, they point out. Kickbacks or bribery are crimes that are clearly not being seen the same way as charges of murder or rioting. In other words, white collar crimes are less serious than charges of murder. |
| But the differential treatment is not just because of that. It is also because how well connected you are with the Congress president. Natwar Singh's proximity to Sonia Gandhi was clearly more than that of either Shibu Soren or Jagdish Tytler. So the Congress has further redefined the yardstick for determining the nature of punishment that a minister should get for his acts of omission and commission. |
| What has also contributed to this special treatment of Natwar Singh is the way the Left parties have remained silent on this issue. Strangely, none of them is vocal about demanding his resignation. The Left made a lot of noise when the question of Shibu Soren and Jagdish Tytler arose. The fact that Natwar Singh's issue pertained to Iraq and a report by an American by the name of Paul Volcker may have made a difference. Not surprisingly, Natwar Singh took full advantage of this and made some anti-US statements in a bid to strengthen the Left's support for him. He could not retain his portfolio, but at least saved his Cabinet berth. |
Top Section
Explore Business Standard