Economic Highlights
New
Delhi, 6 November 2023
Political-Business Nexus
BLATANT, CURBS VOTERS RIGHTS
By Shivaji Sarkar
India is
going through myriad paths. Seven decades ago, Delhi was made the country’s capital
to keep the Bombay Club far from politics. Now its shadow is being seen in the
corridors of power in Delhi. In such times,sweeping and counter accusations become
integral part of the political discourse.
And it’s
not restricted just to a few business houses but goesfar beyond. It appears governments
short of funds and political parties’ lure for it, happily woo the industry. On
the other hand, the industry needs the government even beyond the licence
permit raj for smooth functioning of their business. One such case is the recent
questioning of TMC MP Mahua Moitra by the Lok Sabha Ethics Committee which involves
two major business houses Hiranandani and Adani and she is hitting back. The other
cases include the Rs 8000 crore corporate electoral bonds (EB) and Singur in
West Bengal.
Singur’s
land arbitration award of Rs 766 crore to Tata Motors is curious. Whether it’s faulted
or not is for the courts to decide. More so as it’s glaringly contrary to the Supreme
Court’s 2016 decision calling the acquisition “illegal and void”. While declaring
so the top court said the acquisition failed to meet “requirements under the
Land Acquisition Act 1894”.If that is the case, how could a tribunal order
compensation on illegal acquisition?
Recall,
the Singur plant for producing the Nano car was closed in 2008 following
protestsagainst the then Left Government headed by Buddhadeb Bhattacharya. The
small car was the gigantic gain of Trinamool Congress, wiping out a
‘pro-capitalist’ CPM. It was also the landmark moment of industry houses
gradually getting involved in the “politics of growth” aggressively and setting
in the mindset of selling robust public sector units.
Big business
houses always had some links with the powers-that-be. Even in 1950s and 1960s
it was alleged that several MPs from different parties were on the rolls of
industry houses and asked questions on their behalf. This has continued, but names
of business houses and MPs have changed. And it was no secret but saying so officially
was taboo. Many of the honchos had access to even different prime ministers and
it wasn’t hush-hush, but never so blatant either. Mundhra to Mehtas, it has
been so.
Moitra
boldly dared her detractors by countering a vicious attack and even walking out
of the Ethics Committee meeting accusing it of asking “personal questions” amounting
to“vastraharan” (disrobing). She even argued that no House rule barred
her from sharing a site’s password and it wasn’t her email. Ethics Committee Chairman
Vinod Sonkar shot back saying she behaved in an angry, rude and arrogant manner.
Neither
it is the issue here nor is it to justify it. Moitra has asked 51questions on
Adani group and BJP’s Nishikant Dube alleges she got cash in return. Moitra
says asking questions is her right, as the society must question. That’s right.
The industry houses roaming the corridors of power trample on the rights of the
voters. The people’s quandary is how could their right be compromised for
someone enjoying proximity and enjoying power?
Parallely,
the issue of electoral bonds (EB) being discussed in Supreme Court also speaks
volumes. The court is asking searching questions about the “only person being
deprived knowledge -- the voter”. The bench headed by Chief Justice DY
Chandrachud asked Attorney General R Venkataraman, “As it is everybody knows it
(who EB donors are). The only person who is being deprived is the voter. The
party knows it, your contention that voters don’t have the right to know is
slightly difficult”.
The
bench then observed that a company making losses also could donate gives
credence to shell companies being used by big corporations to make donations to
political parties. “This (EBs) should not become a legitimisation of the quid
pro quo”. It also observed that this system puts a premium on opacity.
“It has to be removed”, the bench said.
This is
critical. Asking searching questions, Moitrabeing tried to be fixed by the Ethics
Committee and the Singur arbitration must be studied in this context. The top
court’s observations are to restore a system that defies transparency. Moitra
being framed for asking questions also involves the issue of transparency. It
is obvious the country has moved far beyond the “decency and coyness” of the
powerful seeking some favours, now trying to capture the portals of power. For
what? Obviously for profits and more. Has the court sensed it?
Let us
go from Singur to Saanand. Once Singur was denied to Tata Motors, it was given
1100 acres land at Saanand for the Nano project. After a few years, Nano was
abandoned. The Rs 400 crore land remains with the Tatas. It also purchases a Ford
unit at Saanand for Rs 725.7 crore. The Nano land also has appreciated by
almost 20 percent.
The CPM
realised Rs 400 crore for Singur land from Tata Motors. In 2011, the West
Bengal government under Mamata Banerjee re-acquired the land. In 2016, Supreme Court
declared entire acquisition null and void. How could the West Bengal
arbitration awards Rs 766 crores plus 11 percent interest on it?
There
may be many more such situations. Is this the reason that public sector
organisations are being shut down and weakened? If private entities become so
powerful as to decide policies everywhere, it does not bode well for the
country.
It’s not
only happening in India but even in the US. But America has ‘anti-trust’ --
anti-monopoly – laws. Despite that the US society is concerned over their
growing clout. The US levied penalty of $170 million on Google You Tube for
flouting children’s privacy issues, $722 million on Alstom, $115 million State
Street Corporation, $2.1 billion on Johnson and Johnson for talc powder causing
ovarian cancer, $125000 on lobbying firm Carmen.
India
has on the other hand done away with the Monopolies and Restrictive Trade
Practices Act. The Competition law is too weak. The increasing nexus between political
parties and companies is undoubtedly a matter of great concern. While
questioning itself is being curbed through various means, it is crucial for
society to address and navigate the complexities arising from the growing nexus
with companies.
Interference
with transparency, ethical practices, and accountability not only jeopardises
the foundation of a more equitable future and a functioning democracy but also
undermines the trust that citizens place in their institutions, highlighting
the urgent need for vigilant oversight and robust reforms to safeguard the integrity
of our democratic processes. It can even convolute the process of growth.---INFA
(Copyright, India News & Feature Alliance)
|