Go stand in the corner

Beauty, we all know when we look at other people's wives (and thank our stars), lies in the eyes of the beholder. Likewise, propriety lies in the minds of those who are expected to set an example by their conduct. It is also an accepted principle that not knowing the law is no excuse for breaking it.

Much the same thing can be said for ensuring proper behaviour amongst public servants, elected and otherwise. That the Collector's wife takes the office car for shopping is seen by the public, but the sahib himself may claim or feign ignorance.

That a finance minister's wife has fought an income tax case on behalf of the government is similar, although the degree of the impropriety is greater.

So, as expected, there was uproar in the Rajya Sabha on Monday over the revelation that Nalini Chidambaram had appeared in an income tax case on behalf of the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT), which functions under the finance minister.

Mrs Chidambaram has stated that the decision to take the case was hers and her husband was not aware of it. Mr Chidambaram has also said that he didn't know what his wife was doing. The CBDT has not covered itself with glory but has clarified that this is the only such case involving Mrs Chidambaram.

The reason for making an exception sounds strange: if it is because Mr Chidambaram was handling the case before he became the minister in charge, it should have been all the more reason for his wife to keep a distance. Out of all this, there emerges a technical impropriety, not skullduggery.

All sorts of allegations have been made in the House, including that Mrs Chidambaram, having lost the case, had caused revenue loss to the exchequer. These strain credulity. The AIADMK MP who brought up the subject also alleged, without evidence, that the government's loss benefited the Karpagambal Mills.

The Mill, it has been alleged (again without substantiation), is linked to Mr Chidambaram's brother. The Rajya Sabha chairman refused permission to discuss the matter on the grounds that no notice had been given. Now the AIADMK member has written to the Rajya Sabha chairman on the issue. The country will wait to see what happens next.

There may be people who think that Mr Chidambaram should resign. But there is extreme irony in someone like Mr Chidambaram, whose probity in public life is above reproach, being pilloried when the world of Indian politics has few who can claim his level of integrity.

So a resignation for a technicality would be harsh punishment, especially because he must be given the benefit of doubt about what he actually knew. It is no argument that, true to his principles, Mr Chidambaram had quit over the Fairgrowth issue in 1993 (that too involved Mrs Chidambaram!).

That was a mistake and to quit now, too, would be a mistake. That said, it would also be wrong of Mr Chidambaram to stop with a plea of ignorance. Errors, whether deliberate or accidental, become more acceptable if accompanied by an apology and a promise to be more careful in the future. How about it, Sir, just a simple sorry?