The Partha Chatterjee syndrome in Bengal

Amitava Mukherjee

(Amitava Mukherjee is a senior journalist and commentator. He can be contacted at amitavamukherjee253@gmail.com)

Just the other day I was talking to one of my journalist friends in Delhi over the phone. The man is perceptive, has a sense of humour and is always able to pick up the right focus from jungles of news and events. He told me that for the last couple of days

Mamata Banerjee and the arrest of her cabinet minister Partha Chatterjee have taken over the normal political discourse in Delhi which is otherwise dominated by events in the Hindi belt and two other north Indian states - Punjab and Jammu and Kashmir. But very few people either in Delhi or in any other part of the country are missing the vital point- how much more soft can the Indian state system allow such a gigantic example of corruption?

Here an alert mind cannot escape the examples and parameters of a soft state which the Swedish economist Gunnar Myrdal had set in his epoch-making work Asian Drama to describe general societal indiscipline prevalent in South Asia and particularly in the developing world. To quote Myrdal "… all the various types of social indiscipline which manifest themselves by deficiencies in legislation and, in particular, law observance and enforcement, a widespread disobedience by public officials and, often, their collusion with powerful persons and groups… within the concept of the soft states belongs also corruption".

The arrest of Partha Chatterjee by the Enforcement Directorate during an inquiry into the recruitment of teachers by the School Service Commission (SSC) is a cause of concern for all of us. Several conclusions and consequences emerge from it some of which have national relevance. The first is the impression of lawmakers and politicians of our country in public minds. What is the general perception? Of course, it will be erroneous to suggest that all politicians are corrupt. There are many shining examples even today. But ask a man on the street. He will say that it is an exception. The lawmakers enjoy plenty of privileges, including bizarre and outlandish things called salaries, allowances and pensions for becoming a member of a legislative body either as an MLA or an MP. Why should it be so? Law-making for the country is a service to the nation. Why should there be salaries and allowances for attending or not attending legislative functions? Or just consider other privileges and perks they enjoy regarding air/ train travels, subsidized canteen services as members of the parliament or state legislatures. The amount of cash and jewellery recovered from ED raids at the premises owned by one of Partha Chatterjee's close acquaintances has further besmirched the general impression about a politician.

The second question is much more important. In India's system of governance, the cabinet functions on a concept of collective responsibility. The court will decide whether Partha Chatterjee is guilty or not. But the ED arrest stems from Partha's alleged activities at a time when he was an important cabinet minister. No doubt the Trinamul Congress has suspended Partha from the party and has divested him of all ministerial positions. However, as complained by the ED, the alleged irregularities committed by the minister took place over a long period. Perhaps the omissions and commissions would not have come to light had not the judiciary intervened. This does not show Mamata Banerjee in any resplendent light that some genuine job seekers who had cleared all examinations are now sitting in a busy intersection of Kolkata demonstrating against the injustice done to them. Why didn't Mamata Banerjee take suo moto actions against Partha Chatterjee? Why did she wait till the court stepped in? If the argument is that she was unaware of the subterranean happenings then it portrays the West Bengal Chief Minister in a very poor light.

However, holding only Mamata Banerjee responsible will be unjust. Instances of ministers and sundry other high functionaries indulging in corrupt activities and the leader of the cabinet looking on benignantly- giving perfect examples of Gunnar Myrdal's soft states- are not in short supply in India. Remember the case of Suresh Kalmadi who was charged with corrupt activities during the 2010 Commonwealth Games during his tenure as the President of the Indian Olympic Association. True, Kalmadi had to go through prison sentences. But that is not the point. The point is that steps were taken against Kalmadi only when there was a hue and cry in the national media about irregularities in the Commonwealth Games works. Or we may just turn back our eyes towards West Bengal which is now in the hotbed of controversy. Years back, Buddhadev Bhattacharjee, then a minister in the Jyoti Basu-led state cabinet, had said that 'he did not want to stay in the 'government of thieves. Was there any truth in Buddhadev's allegations? Not only Buddhadev, even Benoy Chowdhury, a legendary Marxist and the main architect of Operation Barga in West Bengal as the Minister of Land and Revenue, had castigated his government as a 'government of contractors'. Should we take all these innuendoes at their face value?

But the enormity of the seizures by the ED in the SSC scam makes it different from many others in its genre. What was the total figure at the centre of hullabaloo over the Bofors controversy? Rs 64 crore. However, investigations over the SSC case have already unearthed nearly Rs 50 crore in cash. According to media reports, large amounts of property deeds have also been unearthed. The total may cross a hundred crores of rupees, so runs ED claims. This has undoubtedly put the Trinamul Congress in a very uncomfortable situation. The party claims that it has no relation with the cash unearthed and the lady from whose flats cash has been recovered has no relation with the Trinamul Congress.

Will the controversy have any effect on Mamata's attempts to bring together all opposition parties against the BJP? The elections of the President and the Vice President may serve as pointers. In the beginning, the West Bengal Chief Minister had tried hard to find a common opposition candidate against Draupadi Murmu. But the same Mamata surprised everybody at a later stage by saying that had she been told about Murmu's candidature at the earlier stage she would have given thought to it. A more interesting thing happened over the election of the Vice President. Trinamul Congress abstained from voting. It did not vote for Margaret Alva, the opposition candidate, although on the other side was Jagdeep Dhankar, Trinamul's long-time bête noire. The message is clear. At least, temporarily Mamata Banerjee has given up the race for leadership in the opposition bloc.

The Partha Chatterjee episode may have serious impacts not just in West Bengal but in national politics too. It also points out serious loopholes in the cabinet form of government.