Elections and competing narratives of corruption

In the impending general election campaign two competing narratives of corruption are likely to play out. The government’s investigating agencies have suddenly become proactive in pursing corruption charges against Opposition bigwigs. On the other hand Congress president Rahul Gandhi’s direct accusation against the prime minister, “Chowkidar chor hai (The watchman is a thief)” may well become the plank for his party’s come-back.

In the next fortnight or so, before the electoral schedule is announced and the model code of conduct comes into force, the Modi government is likely to take dramatic action against certain Opposition leaders. The Enforcement Directorate has already attached assets of companies linked with the husband of Congress general secretary Priyanka Gandhi, Robert Vadra, in a money-laundering case. His arrest will tarnish the image of the Congress and could demoralise Priyanka Gandhi. 

Others likely to face corruption charges are former finance minister P Chidambaram and his son Karthi Chidambaram. The government has further initiated action against Samajwadi Party leader Akhilesh Yadav. It has also put BSP supremo, Mayawati, under pressure, with action threatened against her next of kin. Mamata Banerjee has managed for now, to fight back dramatically the attempt to implicate her in the chit-fund scams but the continuous questioning of the Kolkata Police Commissioner suggests that confrontation on this issue may persist.

A case against a leader of the Nationalist Congress Party is believed to be ready and he can be arrested by the Maharashtra police any time Delhi gives the go-ahead. It might be recalled that Chandrababu Naidu had to withdraw his state’s consent for CBI raids in Andhra Pradesh against leaders of his Telugu Desam party. These moves indicate that the Modi government will continue to use the corruption narrative for voter consolidation in its favour.

The Opposition’s narrative of corruption against the Modi government is centred on the government’s Rafale fighter-jet deal with Rahul Gandhi directly accusing Prime Minister Modi of acting as a ‘middleman’ for his industrialist friend Anil Ambani who is a beneficiary of an offset contract in the deal. 
 

The Rafale story is unlikely to end with the submission of the report of the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) of India. It is inexplicable why the CAG has delayed submission of a report on the most controversial aspect of the Rafael deal. A second part of its report will be submitted only after the elections examining the allotment of “offsets” – the proportion of the total value of the deal ploughed back as investment in India, and central to the Opposition argument of corruption. 

The Supreme Court’s judgement on the process of decision making in the Rafale deal had been hailed in government-friendly media as giving a “clean chit” to the government. However, the Opposition accusations  acquired fresh credibility after new and shocking facts emerged about parallel negotiations being conducted by the Prime Minister’s Office and a series of unsound business decisions being taken despite strong dissent from a few members of Indian Negotiating Team.

Leaks of Rafale-related documents of the Ministry of Defence will in all likelihood continue to appear serially in the Press, till the general elections. They construct a narrative of corruption and suggest that the Modi government has been less than transparent on the issue. 

The Opposition demand for an inquiry by a Joint Parliamentary Committee also creates an impression that the government has something to hide. After the media revelations on the dropping of anti-corruption clauses – provisions relating to probity, transparency and accountability – and the requirement of a bank guarantee, this demand can no longer be dismissed as just another Opposition ploy to embarrass the government. 

It raises speculations about whether the bonanza of 574 million euros from forgoing the bank guarantee went only to the French company. Only a detailed investigation would reveal whether there were any kickbacks in deliberately negotiating a bad deal which puts India at a disadvantage by allowing large advance pay outs of money -- up to 60 per cent of the total value -- without any actual deliveries.

Yet another chapter of the Rafale controversy still being written relates to the manner in which the matter has proceeded in the Supreme Court. It is remarkable that the apex court has not responded yet to the government’s application to correct its Rafale judgement filed on December 15 last year. On the basis of an apparent ‘misreading’of the government’s submission the Court had concluded that the CAG had examined the pricing issue and submitted its report to Parliament and the Public Accounts Committee. The CAG of course presented its report only two months later in February this year.

The Supreme Court has blamed incomplete paper work by the lawyers of the petitioners who want its judgement on Rafale re-examined for delay in responding to their review petition. However, this still does not explain why it has not taken up the government’s application for ‘correcting’ its judgment on grounds of ‘misreading’ its submission. 

Issuing notices to the petitioners who had questioned the procedure followed in the Rafale deal and asked for a court-monitored CBI inquiry, may lead to additional facts that have since come to light to the court . Under these circumstances the apex court may in its wisdom decide to revise its old order substantially. An adverse order before the general election could have serious political consequences. If the Rafale issue is kept alive in the judicial system that too suits the Opposition in the run up to the polls.

However, the electoral discourse building up around corruption can be entirely side-lined if tensions between India and Pakistan escalate. Any action the government may have been planning against Opposition leaders may then be delayed or deferred depending on the Indian response to the terrorist strike in Pulawma. If any military response by India escalates into war, then Prime Minister Modi could become the master of the political discourse once again. In such an event, the public mood will change and so would the outcome of the general election.

The writer is a journalist based in Delhi. He tweets @bharatitis