West Bengal: A choice between a rock and a hard place

Saswat Panigrahi

Of the five provinces going to elections in April-May, West Bengal’s is the most interesting case. The election will be a tough test for the ruling CPI(M) as well as the opposition Trinamool Congress.

Till now West Bengal was seemingly immune to the anti-incumbency factor. With Mamata Banerjee-led Trinamool Congress emerging as a viable alternative force to the CPI(M), it is for the first time in over 33 years that the Left Front government is facing a strong anti-incumbency.

West Bengal’s present political scenario has its roots in its political history. To understand the difficult political calculus of the state, it is necessary to flip through the pages of the history.

The rise of Left

The year was 1977. Riding the anti-Emergency wave CPI(M) rode to the crest of West Bengal’s power centre ousting the Congress government led by Siddhartha Shankar Ray. Jyoti Basu, then 63, was sworn in as the Chief Minister.

Ever since the London-educated barrister Basu took over the reins of the state, West Bengal’s development graph continued to dip alarmingly, pushing the state into an era of decline and anarchy. The industrial slowdown in turn created a sizable number of unemployed youth who were often converted into CPI(M) cadre.

Under Jyoti Basu’s rule winning had become a habit for the Left. Under his leadership, CPI(M) tasted six consecutive victories in Assembly Elections.

It is not to dispute that Jyoti Basu built the Left citadel in West Bengal. Basu has to his credit the fact of being the longest serving Chief Minister of not just the state, but also in India, as he held the post for 23-long-years till he resigned on health grounds in 2000.

A vertical shift in CPM

The year 2000 proved to be the beginning of a new chapter in West Bengal politics. Buddhadeb Bhattacharjee, a liberal among the Marxists, who was considered as a viable alternative to Jyoti Basu within the CPI(M), was sworn in as the Chief Minister. In sharp contrast to Marxist ideology Bhattacharjee opened West Bengal’s door for industries and investments. Some called him ‘CPI(M)’s renaissance man’ and others termed him ‘anti-Marxists’. But, Buddhadeb’s mega industry plank clicked in 2006, as CPI(M) swept the Assembly Elections.

A boomerang on CPI(M)

Post 2006, Buddhadeb brand of industrialisation began to have few takers. There is no denial that Bhattacharjee regime brought a number of investment projects to the state. But the other side of the story, of course, is the plight of thousands of displaced people who have been denied the benefits of these projects. Singur and Nandigram are two cases in point.

Ever since Buddhadeb took over the reins of CPI(M) in West Bengal, it has not been the same party with the same ideology. CPI(M) leaders in the state are no longer committed comrades. The party betrayed the bourgeois, the very section it claims to fight for. CPI(M) in Bengal is now battling the allegations of championing the cause of capitalism at the cost of the poor. Its so-called claim of being a ‘people’s party’ has turned out to be a facade. Years of grievances have produced growing disenchantment in the party cadres.

The Mamata phenomenon

Here Trinamool Congress supremo Mamata Banerjee, who was earlier lacking stability as a political leader, saw a ready-made opportunity. She closely identified the Left issues, hijacked them in a Left bastion and used them against the Left. She carefully toed a Communist line to woo people who are predominantly supportive of the Left. A sizable chunk of CPI(M) cadres, which was feeling uncomfortable with the changing ideology of the party, switched sides.

Mamata instilled a new Left thunder. Her formula of targeting Communists with Communism did wonders for Trinamool. The party swept the 2008 panchayat polls. In the 2009 General Election, Trinamool won 19 of the 42 Lok Sabha seats. And in 2010, it won the Kolkata municipal elections.

Rakta Charitra of Bengal

Looking at the rise of Mamata Banerjee, CPI(M) mobilised its cadres for a ‘stop Mamata campaign’ in a desperate bid to retain power. On the other hand, Trinamool Congress brainwashed its cadres against the ‘misgovernance’ under CPI(M) rule. The result: a macabre fight between the cadres of the two rival parties.

The CPI(M) and Trinamool cadres were up in arms against each other in the run-up to the Assembly Elections. In the last few months a number of carefully orchestrated political killings took place in the state. In what could be rightly termed as ‘body politics’ both CPI(M) and Trinamool paraded dead bodies of their party workers. The state of political rivalry was at its ugliest.

Maoists in West Bengal

Charu Majumdar, the architect of Maoism in India, was a CPI(M) comrade till he broke away from the party to launch Naxalbari uprising. It is said that CPI(M) maintained close links with the Maoists during the initial years of their movement. There is no doubt that the Marxists and Maoists share a common ideology that is Communism. In the course of time, the CPI(M) distanced itself from the Maoists realising a potential danger. By raising Communist issues against CPI(M), Mamata stepped in to fill that void. Maoists now see a new friend in Mamata.


It won’t be wrong to say that Maoists boiled Mamata’s Singur and Nandigram pots. The Trinamool supremo has openly sided with the Left-wing terror by paying homage to Maoist leader Cherukuri Rajkumar alias Azad in Lalgarh where she described his encounter as murder.

The Maoist-Trinamool nexus is certainly a poll issue with both CPI(M) and BJP flaying Mamata for romanticising Left-wing terror. But will that have a bearing on the poll result?

The minority card

Both CPI(M) and Trinamool Congress have a grip on minority vote bank. Both have understood that minority votes are crucial to the calculations of victory and hence are playing the minority card by doling out sops.

CPI(M)-led Left Front government has already announced 10 per cent reservation in government jobs for backward Muslims. In addition to that Buddhadeb government has extended reservations for Muslim students in higher educational institutions.

On the other hand, in an apparent bid to woo Muslim votes, Mamata Banerjee recently supported minority’s share in women’s quota. In addition, she has given tickets to a good number of minority candidates.

The coalition equation

The constituents in the Left front -- CPI(M), CPI, Forward Bloc and RSP comfortably decided to share seats for the Assembly Elections. But all was not well between the two UPA constituents, Congress and Trinamool, as far as the seat-sharing equation is concerned. After days of hectic political negotiations to break the impasse both the parties agreed to a seat-sharing pact. As expected, Mamata Banerjee turned out to be a hard bargainer and Congress surrendered to Mamata’s tough stance. As per the deal, in the 294-member Assembly, Trinamool will contest in 229 seats while Congress will contest in 65. The seat-sharing script appears to have been written by Mamata. The Congress is a junior coalition partner of Trinamool Congress in the state. The grand old party has only a fractional presence in the state and is desperately looking forward to share a victory after a gap of 33 years. It has no other choice, but to settle for a small share of the cake.

On the other hand, Mamata had her own arithmetic. She wants to come to power on her own, so that she could be less dependent on Congress after the polls. Trinamool made an official seat-sharing arrangement with Socialist Unity Centre of India (SUCI) and gave two seats from its kitty. The party could make a similar arrangement with other smaller players like Adivasi Mukti Morcha, Indian Muslim League, Jharkhand Disom Party, Gorkha Mukti Morcha and Chhatradhar Mahato-led pro-Maoist outfit People’s Committee Against Police Atrocities(PPCA) to add small pockets of support.

BJP, the new X-factor in West Bengal

BJP has played nationalism to the public gallery of West Bengal by launching its Rastriya Ekta Yatra from Kolkata, the birthplace of Shyama Prasad Mookerjee. By doing so the saffron party has tried to tap the ‘nationalist sentiments’ in West Bengal. In its election campaign BJP will certainly draw lines between nationalist leaders, the saffron party and West Bengal. The party is capitalising on the prevailing anti-Left sentiments in the state and claims its stake as a “serious political alternative”.

The real fight

In the battle ground West Bengal, the real fight is ironically between a ‘capitalist’ CPI(M) vs a ‘communist’ Trinamool.

There is a growing discontentment against the CPI(M) in both urban and rural pockets of the state. In the division of anti-Left votes Trinamool would be the biggest gainer. Trinamool is essentially an urban party with a strong base in South Bengal, particularly in Kolkata. Hence there is a clear cut possibility that Trinamool will score an edge over CPI(M) as far as the urban votes are concerned.

Buddhadeb’s pro-industry plank has significantly alienated CPI(M)’s rural vote bank. On the other hand, there has been gradual erosion in rural vote base of Trinamool. Reading between the lines, CPI(M)’s rural votes have shifted to Trinamool.

It’s now a changed Bengal. The writing is on the wall, “Didi is marching towards Writers’ Building. Bye bye Left Front”. But still, it would be too early to predict the election result at this point in time because the ballots are yet to be cast. Wait, watch and wonder!

-- Published in Zee online

State elections 2011: The title contenders

Buddhadeb Bhattacharjee (CPM-led Left Front)

Buddhadeb Bhattacharjee, the second time Chief Minister of West Bengal, is considered as a liberal among the Marxists. He started his political career as a primary member of CPM. He was elected as a MLA from Cossipore constituency in 1977, the year CPM came to power in West Bengal and became a minister for information and culture. He continued to maintain his profile in the rank and file of both CPM and Bengal politics. In 1993, Buddhadeb tendered his resignation from the state cabinet due to a significant difference of opinion with then chief minister Jyoti Basu. Within the CPM, Bhattacharjee was always considered as a viable alternative to Basu. That eventually led to him to become the chief minister in 2000.

In sharp contrast to Marxist ideology Bhattacharjee opened West Bengal’s door for industries and investments. Some called him ‘CPM’s renaissance man’ and others termed him ‘anti-Marxists’. But, Buddhadeb’s mega industry plank clicked in 2006 as CPI(M) swept the assembly elections.

Post 2006, Buddhadeb brand of industrialisation faced criticism. Buddhadeb’s pro-industry programme at the cost of livelihood of the people boomeranged on CPI(M). CPI(M) in Bengal could not remain the same party with the same ideology. It is now battling allegations of championing the cause of capitalism at the cost of the poor.

Mamata Banerjee (Congress supported Trinamool candidate)

Mamata Banerjee started her political career with Congress and quickly rose to the rank of general secretary of the All India Youth Congress. In 1984 she was elected to Lok Sabha defeating CPM strongman Somnath Chatterjee from the Jadavpur parliamentary constituency. She was one of India’s young parliamentarians in 1980s. Banerjee was made the Union Minister of State for Human Resources Development, Youth Affairs and Sports, and Women and Child Development in the Narasimha Rao government in 1991.

In 1997, Mamata Banerjee left the Congress alleging that the party was behaving as a stooge of the CPM in West Bengal and floated Trinamool Congress. Trinamool quickly became the primary opposition to the long-standing Communist government in the state.

In 1999, Banerjee joined the BJP-led NDA government and became the Railways Ministry. In 2001 she walked out of the NDA cabinet and allied with the Congress Party in West Bengal Assembly elections held in the same year.

She again returned to the NDA fold and joined the cabinet as a Coal and Mines minister in 2004. In 2009 general elections she formed an alliance with Congress-led UPA. Mamata, the leader of the second largest party of UPA coalition became the Union Railway Minister again. But due to West Bengal elections, Mamata remains indifferent towards the crucial ministry and eyeing for the chief minister’s chair in Writer’s building.

The fluctuating political profile of Mamata Banerjee tells a story. Mamata was earlier lacking stability as a political leader. But, with the emergence of a ‘capitalist CPI(M)’ under Buddhadeb Bhattacharjee’s rule, she found a ready-made opportunity. She has closely identified the Left issues, hijacked them in the Left bastion and used them against the Left.

M Karunanidhi (DMK)

Karunanidhi began his career as a screenwriter in the Tamil film industry. He thoroughly used both Tamil literature and Tamil cinema as medium to propagate fanatic Dravidian movement.

He entered to the foray of politics by anti-Hindi agitations. He was first elected to the Tamil Nadu assembly in 1957 in a DMK ticket. He became the DMK treasurer in 1961 and deputy leader of opposition in the state assembly in 1962.

When the DMK came to power in 1967, he became the minister for public works. Karunanidhi has been the leader of the DMK since the demise of the party founder CN Annadurai in 1969. He took over as Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu in 2006 after DMK defeated its main opponent AIDMK.

In this election, Karunanidhi’s DMK is facing the biggest ever threat to its position. With the DMK patriarch’s blue eyed boy and former telecom minister A Raja under CBI custody for 2G spectrum scam, investigations are haunting Karunanidhi, his party and his family. There is no doubt that 2G scam issue will bring a negative swing against DMK in this election. But Karunanidhi is all set to fight it out with his money power.

There are other issues like Lankan Tamil issue and fishermen’s killing adding to Karunanidhi’s anti-incumbency woes.

In addition, there is infighting in his family. With Karunanidhi on the verge of calling it a day, a neck and neck battle between his children for his succession has erupted. The family feud has also created fissures in the party.

J Jayalalithaa (AIADMK)

After a successful career in Tamil film industry as an actress J Jayalalithaa joined AIADMK in 1981. Her association with politics grew because of her proximity to Late MG Ramachandran (popularly known as MGR) and that helped her to become his political heir.

In 1988, she was nominated to the Rajya Sabha. In 1989, Jayalalithaa won the elections to the Tamil Nadu legislative assembly and incidentally became the first woman to be elected as the Leader of the Opposition.

In 1991, following the assassination of Rajiv Gandhi, just days before the elections, her alliance with the Congress paid off as a sympathy wave propelled the coalition to a massive victory. She was re-elected to the legislative assembly and became the first elected woman chief minister of Tamil Nadu.

In 1996 assembly election, AIADMK lost to DMK in a landslide defeat. In 2001 Tamil Nadu polls, defying the pre-poll predictions Jayalalithaa returned to power with a huge majority and mustered a bigger coalition. In 2006, Tamil Nadu assembly elections, her AIADMK had to relinquish power to DMK.

VS Achuthanandan (CPM led LDF)

VS Achuthanandan is the senior most leader of CPI(M) in Kerala. He started his political career as a Congress trade union leader in 1930s. In 1940 he joined the CPI. During 1957 Indo-China war, he was amongst the handful of Communist ‘nationalists’ to support India. Remember, he was demoted in the party rank after participating in a blood donation camp to help Indian soldiers? In 1964, CPM was carved away from CPI and Achuthanandan joined the CPM. He served as a CPM state secretary between 1980 and 1992. Since 1985 he is the member of the CPI(M) politburo, the highest policy making body of the party.

Achuthanandan served as an editor of CPI(M)’s Malayalam mouth piece Deshabhimani.

As a Chief Minister he made tall promises for industrialisation but hardly manage to keep them.

In 2009 Achuthanandan was suspended from the politburo for his tussle with state secretary Pinarayi Vijayan.

In July last he hurled a political bombshell by saying “an attempt is going on to convert Kerala into an Islamic state”. Very obviously, his ‘Islamic Kerala’ byte faced the ire of his party. His comment was slammed by Muslim organisations. Congress flayed Achuthanandan by saying it was part of CPI(M)’s strategy to play the ‘Hindu card’.

For this election like the last, CPI(M) state committee first denied Achuthanandan a party ticket to contest poll, but following huge outcry by his supporters, CPI(M) politburo intervened and the state committee had to reverse its decision.

The 87-year-old CPI(M) patriarch is contesting Kerala polls and hopes to retain power.

Oommen Chandy (Congress led UDF)

Oommen Chandy ventured into political arena as an activist of Kerala Students Union (KSU) and soon became its president.

In 1970, he was elected as the president of the State Youth Congress. Chandy served as a labour minister, home minister and finance minister of Kerala in between 1977 to 1994.

Oommen Chandy became the Kerala CM in 2004 after senior Congress leader AK Anthony vacated the post to take up a national assignment.

Since 2006 he has been serving as the Leader of the Opposition in the Kerala Legislative Assembly.

Tarun Kumar Gogoi (Congress)

Gogoi started his political career as a Youth Congress leader. Late Prime Minister Indira Gandhi spotted his promising young talent and entrusted him with the responsibility of organising the Youth Congress in Assam. In 1971, Gogoi was elected to Lok Sabha.

Gogoi was the joint secretary of All India Congress Committee in 1976. The six-time Lok Shabha MP served as a Union Minister from 1991 to 95. In 2001 he assumed the Office of Assam’s chief minister. In 2006, Gogoi beat the anti-incumbency and came back to power.

In this election, an anti-incumbency storm is brewing against his decade-long government. Tarun Gogoi government is battling allegations of various scams quantified to the tune of Rs 20,000 crore. In addition to that, there are issues like illegal immigration and tea garden issue which adds to Gogoi’s anti-incumbency woes.

Prafulla Kumar Mahanta(AGP)

Prafulla Mahanta is regarded as the other most powerful and influential politicians of Assam. Mahanta is credited for becoming the youngest chief minister in the country`s history.

He started his political career with All Assam Students Union, a student organisation that spearheaded the Assam Movement between 1979 and 1985. After serving as the president of All Assam Students Union, Mahanta joined the Asom Gana Parishad (AGP).

He served as the chief minister of Assam for two terms -- 1985–1990 and 1996–2001. In 2005, his membership in the AGP was terminated and he floated a new political party, Asom Gana Parishad (Progressive).

But his need in AGP was largely felt before the 2009 Lok Sabha Elections to fill the void of leadership. He was re-inducted into the AGP and became an integral part of the party again. In 2010, he was unanimously elected as the Leader of Opposition in the Assam Legislative Assembly.

V Vaithilingam (Congress)

V Vaithilingam is a Congress strongman in the union territory of Puducherry.

Vaithilingam contested for the 1980 assembly election with a Congress ticket and lost with a close margin. He won the 1985 assembly election and became a public works and power minister. Vaithilingam was sworn in as the chief minister of Puduchery in 1991.

When Congress in the union territory was marred by a rift within, the party high command asked the elected chief minister N Rangaswamy to resign in 2008 and Vaithilingam became the Chief Minister.

Vaithilingam advocates smaller government and greater participation of private sector. It seems Vaithilingam-led Congress government faces little opposition in the union territory of Puducherry.

N Rangaswamy (All India NR Congress)

N Rangaswamy started his political career from the Congress party and soon rose in party’s rank and file.

He held important portfolios like agriculture minister and PWD minister in the union territory in between 1991 and 2000.

It was under his leadership Congress had grown by leaps and bounds in Puducherry. In 2001 after Congress won another term, Rangaswamy was sworn as the Chief Minister. In 2006 the Congress-led Democratic Progressive Alliance(DPA) came back to power and Rangaswamy was re-inducted as the chief minister.

As a chief minister, Rangaswamy was largely instrumental in developing the infrastructure of Puducherry. He introduced free education in government schools and fee reimbursement for college students.

It was under his tenure as chief minister that Puducherry was recognised as the best in the small state category.

In 2008, Congress in the Union territory was marred by internecine infighting. The party high command asked Rangaswamy to resign.

After resigning from Congress, Rangaswamy floated his political party called All India NR Congress.

He is known for his down-to-earth life style.

-- As it appeared in the Battle for states 2011 coverage of Zeeonline

JPC all set to probe 2G

Saswat Panigrahi

The government finally gave in to the Opposition’s demand. A 30-member Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) will probe the 2G spectrum scam.

It was for obvious reasons the Congress-led UPA government didn’t want to sanction a JPC earlier, and hence desperately manoeuvred to avoid being on a collision course with the Opposition; but there was no escaping the predicament in a parliamentary setup.

The wash out of the entire Winter Session of Parliament, causing a loss of over Rs 146 crore to the national exchequer, was a strong enough reason to force a rethink but what seems to have tilted the scales in favour of a truce seems to be the serious strain that the standoff inflicted on the entire system.

A “functioning” democracy where the opposite poles only repel each other and not maintain a fine balance between love & hate; agreement & disagreement, was not in anybody’s interests – although lately, but everybody agreed; they had to, there should be no other way. “We couldn’t succeed to persuade the Opposition not to insist on a JPC probe despite our best efforts.... It is in these special circumstances that the government agrees to the setting up of a JPC,” Prime Minister Manmohan Singh said at the fist working day of the Budget Session, while announcing the setting up of a JPC to look into the allocation of second-generation spectrum.

So what is a JPC?

The Joint Parliamentary Committee is an ad hoc committee constituted under Article 118(1) of Indian Constitution, which is mandated to inquire into and report on the prominent questions concerning the country on a specific subject. The subject for which it is constituted is known as “the terms of reference”. A Joint Parliamentary Committee, as the name suggests is constituted by members of both Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha, drawn from different political parties. For a political party, the representation in JPC is decided as per its ratio of representation in the Parliament.

The JPC on 2G is finally in shape. The JPC motion has been passed in both Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha. All eyes are on what JPC will bring out in its probe.

To obtain evidence on its ‘Terms of reference’, the JPC will now consult experts, public bodies, associations, individuals and even interested parties suo moto or on requests made by them. The JPC can ask any individual or agency to appear before it and the non compliance of the summon amounts to a contempt of the House. Although the proceedings of the JPC are by and large confidential, but in a matter related to “widespread public interest” like serious irregularities in securities and financial transactions, the chairman of the committee could brief the press about the deliberations.

Generally, the JPC does not summon the Prime Minister or a minister during the course of its inquiry. But in matters involving “widespread public interest” the JPC has the discretionary power to summon ministers, including the Prime Minister to testify.

Although it is yet unclear whether the 2G issue would be considered as a matter of “widespread public interest”, but there is every possibility Prime Minister may be summoned.

The supposed chief architect of the scam, DMK leader A Raja resigned in November last and was arrested in this February and is spending time in Tihar Jail since then.

However, the fact that he was the telecom minister in Manmohan Singh’s cabinet and the decision to allocate 2G spectrum licence at prices far below what an open auction could have ensured, is something for which the accountability would seep till it reaches the last door.

The Comptroller and Auditor-General (CAG) of India exposed serious irregularities in the allocation of 2G spectrum and pegged the revenue loss to the national exchequer at a staggering Rs 1.76 lakh crore, thereby dubbing it as country's biggest corruption scandal to date.

Although, the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) is scrutinising the CAG report and conducting an audit, but the 2G spectrum scam surely goes beyond accounting and the fact is that JPC does have a broader remit of investigation.

The JPC will examine the policy prescription and their interpretation by successive governments, including decisions of the Union Cabinet and the consequences thereof, in allocation and pricing of telecom licences and spectrum from 1998 to 2009.

The Supreme Court is already monitoring the 2G scam probe and directed the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) and Enforcement Directorate(ED) to investigate the scam. Interestingly, the CBI is facing the heat from the apex court for dragging its feet on the probe.

The SC’s observations do make the government squirm but what is of more consequence – in the long term- is the political fallout of the entire episode.

Ever since the scam broke, Congress has been trying to sweep it under the carpet. New Telecom Minister Kapil Sibal questioned the findings of the CAG report, resplendent with his bizarre ‘zero loss’ arithmetic.

“We are extremely pained at methodology adopted by CAG for arriving at 2G spectrum allocation loss figures”, Sibal said, without affording even a thought about the damage he is doing to the credibility of the very institutions that form the pillars of his government .

JPC on 2G scam is fifth of its kind. Let’s take a look at the JPCs formed earlier and their findings. Of the previous four JPCs, two JPCs were constituted during Congress’ rule and two during the rule of BJP-led NDA.

JPC on Bofors

The first JPC was constituted in 1987 to inquire into the Bofors pay off case by the Rajiv Gandhi-led Congress government. A year after the Bofors gun deal was signed between the Indian government and the now defunct Swedish arms company AB Bofors in 1986; Swedish radio reported that Bofors paid kickbacks to ruling Indian politicians and key defence officials to clinch the Rs 1,437 crore deal Howitzer gun deal.

In sharp contravention of the established policy guidelines which prescribes against the presence of middlemen in defence deals, Italian businessman Ottavio Quattrocchi played the role of a broker. Moreover, all kickback amounts added to the cost of the guns purchased; for which India paid an excess amount of 242.62 million Swedish kroners.

As the skeletons began to tumble out of Congress’ closet, the opposition stepped up pressure for a JPC. After months of denial the Rajiv Gandhi government finally conceded opposition demand for a JPC.

A motion on the JPC was moved by then defence minister KC Pant in Lok Sabha on August 6, 1987. B Shankaranand, a ‘trusted loyalist’ of the Gandhi family was chosen as the chairperson. The Congress had 410 members in Lok Sabha and hence very obliviously the committee was packed with Congress MPs. It won’t be wrong to call it a “Congress JPC”. However, in order to give the committee an ‘all-party’ colour some MPs of friendly parties were hand-picked as members. The JPC did not summon a single minister, let alone the prime minister. The committee never bothered to record the testimonies of witnesses in Bofors case. The opposition boycotted the committee. But it went ahead with its ‘lame duck inquiry and held as much as 50 sittings and came out with its report.

The JPC report was tabled in Parliament on April 26, 1988. The report exonerated everybody. No middleman was involved in the Bofors gun deal and no evidence of kickbacks been paid, said the report.

JPC on Harshad Mehta scam

The year was 1992. Media reports exposed how stock market broker Harshad Mehta illegally dipped into the banking system to finance his stock buying spree. PV Narasimha Rao-led Congress government announced a JPC to probe the multi-billion rupee stock market scam. The JPC motion was moved by then parliamentary affairs minister Ghulam Nabi Azad in Lok Sabha on August 6, 1992. Former Congress leader Ram Niwas Mirdha presided over the JPC. This time the JPC faithfully did its duty because there was minimal interference from the Congress party.

The JPC which probed the irregularities in securities and banking transactions between August 1992 and December 1993 came out with a comprehensive report which was tabled in Parliament on December 21, 1993.

But, after submission of the JPC report, it took five long years to prosecute the accused. Though many of the recommendations in the report were never implemented, it is said that those recommendations paved a way to clean up India’s financial sector.

JPC on Ketan Parekh scam

Year 2001; yet another stock market scam broke. Following the footprints of Harshad Mehta, another stock broker called Ketan Parekh skilfully manipulated the Indian stock market between 1999-2001 by rigging up the stock prices and swindled crores of rupees from the banks.

Atal Bihari Vajpayee-led NDA government agreed to a JPC to investigate the nexus between Parekh, banks and corporate houses.

The JPC motion was moved by then parliamentary affairs minister Pramod Mahajan in Lok Sabha on April 26, 2001. The JPC was presided by senior BJP leader Lt Gen Prakash Mani Tripathi.

The committee held 105 sittings, completed its probe in eighteen months and came out with a report which called for a sweeping change in the stock market regulations. The report was unanimously accepted cutting across party lines and implemented in letter and spirit.

JPC on pesticides residues

In 2003, media reports brought out the presence of pesticide cocktail in soft drinks, fruit juice and other beverages. Atal Behari Vajpayee-led NDA government announced a JPC to look into the pesticides residues in soft drinks.

As against the norm, the JPC was presided over by a leader from the opposition -- NCP chief Sharad Pawar. The committee held 17 sittings and came out with its report. The report was tabled in the Parliament on February 4, 2004. The report confirmed the presence of pesticide residues and suggested safety standards for beverages.

Looking at the outcome of all the four JPCs, it could be concluded that apart from the Bofors JPC, the rest three JPCs yielded result.

Was it because the Bofors was the only case where the political class was directly involved? Was it because the case involved Rajiv Gandhi and that the JPC was Congress controlled? Answers to these questions are open to debate but the fact remains that more than any other party, the Congress has the most to answer, especially now that the damning 2G scam has exploded.

Undoubtedly, the political lexicon has dramatically changed from those gun powder filled days of 1987 to today’s era of coalition fixing.

No single party, not even the Congress can claim politics as its exclusive fielded. An aggressive Opposition – mostly made of those with whom there’s no foreseeable scope of rapprochement - will track every move.

The tax payers’ money has gone into the coffers of “unknown” scamsters. Rs 1.76 lakh crore pocketed by Raja and his cronies alone? Not possible. For one single individual or even a small group to digest such huge sums of money, to say the least, is impossible.

In the system we live in, they won’t be allowed to have such large appetites, sharing is the rule of the game here. Everybody knows it.

Whosoever has attempted to digest hard currency in such large amounts will have to cough it up; if this is not a matter of public interest, then what is?

The citizens have the right to know, let’s hope they get to “know” atleast this time.