• The reason I asked you this was, when it came to your succession, a new debate came in: that a president should be a politician and a vice-president needn't be a political figure. Do you think these criteria are valid?

These are all old, outdated ideas. You see, my feeling is that you have to see if the president has the capacity to contribute to the nation's vision, the nation's core, the nation's aim. That's what should be the criterion. And from that, all aspects have to converge.

• So it doesn't matter if the president is a politician or not.

No, I don't think it (being or not being a politician) is a very important criterion. I have studied all the previous presidents and their lives. Before me there were ten presidents. In the first few months (in office), I studied what each one of them has done. Each one of them has contributed uniquely. They have brought core competencies. Someone brought political competence, someone brought judicial competence, someone brought educational competence, and someone who started off from the labour force brought core competence from there. We are all standing on the shoulders of some very experienced people. That's how I looked at it.

• So what core competence do you think will Pratibha Patil bring to the Rashtrapati Bhavan?

Well, that she will know better. The new president will know what she can contribute. Definitely, as a lady, she may have many things to contribute, for 50 per cent of the people are women. She can uniquely contribute something for women, women's rights, women's development, or the whole nation's development.

... contd.