Opinion ‘Big Brother’ Sibal

Coming down severely on the UPA’s Big Brother attitude,the Organiser says the move shows all the signs of a regime in panic,looking for reasons to stifle uncomfortable voices after failing to perform as a government. “Should the government be taking control? Expecially a government that is not able to perform its mandate? A government that speaks in several voices? And what would the mechanism be? Will it set up another committee,headed by Kapil Sibal to monitor the Net?” asks the Organiser.

Rejecting Sibal’s arguments,the Organiser contends that laughing at oneself,and especially at those in politics,is a part of a healthy democracy. Even Jawaharlal Nehru had told the cartoonist Shankar not to spare him,it recalls. And to blame the Internet for inciting communal feelings was to give more credit to the medium than it deserves,it says,underlining the fact that some of the worst communal riots in this country occurred at a time when there was no Internet.

Quality of mercy

Another article in the Organiser makes a strong demand to amend Article 72 of the Constitution (which deals with the president’s powers to grant pardon and mercy) in the context of the delay in deciding the fate of Mohammed Afzal Guru,the key accused in the terror attack on Parliament 10 years ago.

Contending that it would be in the national interest to impose a timebound frame on mercy petition decisions,the article maintains that the continuing delay,which is the proverbial justice denied,only emboldens those plotting such attacks,not to mention the burden on the exchequer,in the upkeep and welfare of the likes of Afzal Guru and Ajmal Kasab. It says that the United States acted swiftly following the 9/11 attack on the World Trade Centre,with a new law — the Patriot Act — for intelligence and security agencies to deal with terror,with the result that there has not been a single attack there since.

The article says that every year,the sacrifice of those who gave their lives to protect Parliament is remembered in a ritualistic manner. “Is it enough? No,as we have miserably failed to punish the guilty even several years after the Supreme Court verdict” it says,alleging that this delay was part of the UPA’s bid to appease minorities and indulge in votebank politics. “As the president is bound by the advice of the executive,the main culprit thus,in this case,is the Union executive. The delay of about five years for a matter that can be disposed in a day is wholly on account of the executive headed by the prime minister,” it says,adding that the “time has come to have a relook at this power so as to protect the human rights of over a billion people”.

In the dock

The Panchajanya,on the other hand,has trained its guns on the home minister,P. Chidambaram,after a Delhi court’s order allowing Subramanian Swamy to reappear as a witness and present fresh evidence in the 2G spectrum case against him. The Panchajanya claims that the government is still anxious to defend Chidambaram,despite the court expressing satisfaction at Swamy’s arguments. Chidambaram’s role had come under a cloud,it says,when the finance ministry in March this year pointed to his role as finance minister then in the context of 2G spectrum licences.

Claiming that the case against him is getting stronger by the day,the article says that if Swamy is able to satisfy the court with fresh evidence and witnesses,which will compel the deposition of the home minister as a witness,it will spell trouble for him. How will the government then save Chidambaram from standing alongside A. Raja as an accused,it asks.

Compiled by Swaraj Thapa