‘A Frankenstein’s monster that will devour all of us’
by Krishen Kak on 11 May 2011 8 Comments

Three earlier essays on “the Hazare phenomenon” enlarged on the duplicity involved of Hazare and company in their crusade against corruption.[1] The essays noted, in particular, the shady financial dealings and absence of transparency and accountability in the publicly-presented accounts of the NGOs of Hazare & co., though they demand transparency and accountability from others.  Scanned were data in the public domain of Anna Hazare and his NGOs, Arvind Kejriwal and his NGOs, Kiran Bedi and her NGO, Swami Agnivesh, Mallika Sarabhai, Shanti and Prashant Bhushan, Medha Patkar, Aruna Roy and Harsh Mander. Justice Hegde’s association with the politically-biased Hazare & co., while still Karnataka State Lokayukta, was questioned.  Noted too was the gross hypocrisy of their alignment with the person publicly described as the source of corruption in India.


In “The ox calling the donkey horned”, Aruna Roy was quoted on the Jan Lokpal Bill drafted by Kejriwal with support from Hegde and Prashant Bhushan. She called it “a Frankenstein’s monster that will devour all of us”. Aruna Roy is Convener of the Government of India’s National Advisory Council Working Group on Transparency, Accountability and Governance. She is thus Sonia Gandhi’s NAC mukhota in the war against corruption, just as Anna Hazare is Kejriwal’s PCRF’s IAC’s mukhota.  


This fourth essay, in continuation of the three earlier ones, attempts a response to the NAC perception of the Hazare bill as a Frankenstein’s monster - the wheels within wheels of these so-called “civil society” activists apparently confronting the corruption of politicians while in reality working in tandem with them. “Roy said it was absolutely crucial to impose accountability on the Lokpal. ‘Accountability is exceedingly important. How can there be a super-structure like the Lokpal which is above everything else. And this question has not been adequately addressed in the Bill. If we do not have a critical review of the Bill, we will create a Frankenstein’s monster that will devour all of us,’ Roy said.”[2] 


The ox calling the donkey horned” concluded with two straightforward tests for the bona fides of Hazare & co. The first, that they demand the Prime Minister give sanction to Dr Subramanian Swamy to prosecute Mrs Sonia Gandhi for the colossal corruption he details she is involved in. The second, that any entity - NGOs included - that receives largesse in any form whatever from the public exchequer be brought within the purview of their Jan Lokpal Bill.


To date there is no report that these self-selected “civil society” representatives are inclined to have their bona fides tested, other than by themselves asserting their good faith and abusing for mala fide - “smear campaign” - those who dare question them. If they preach accountability as “exceedingly important”, why are they excluding their own NGOs from such accountability? If the monster will devour “us”, who is this “us” for whom Aruna Roy is so fearful? 


A civil society member Shanmuga Patro, Advocate, has petitioned the Delhi High Court that the Rajiv Gandhi Foundation be declared a “public authority” within the meaning of the RTI Act.[3] The Rajiv Gandhi Foundation is headed by Sonia Gandhi with Rahul Gandhi a trustee and Priyanka Gandhi Vadra as executive trustee. It was set up in 1991 and is the recipient of considerable public largesse, including the possession of a very valuable piece of centrally-located public land in New Delhi. Its official website gives its partners and donors for only some years (many are PSUs and government departments and offices), its annual reports presented are only for 2006 and 2007 and, two decades after its founding, it’s “Financials” page remains “under construction”.


Former policeman and staunch Hazare supporter, Y.P. Singh, was asked why he hadn’t joined Hazare’s April agitation.  Here is his reply:

A.     Activists should never be part of any government committee or else they shall be a judge in their own cause while evaluating the outcome: After I quit the Indian Police Service, it was my resolve not to become member of any government committee. The reason is that if constructive critics themselves become a part of any government committee, then who will be there to put forward a critical account of the final outcome. The activist shall become a judge in this own cause, which would force him to support an undesirable outcome. Now the position is that even if the Lokpal Bill does not come up to the mark, Anna being a member of the committee shall have to praise it.


B.     Why I decided to keep away from Anna’s campaign of April 2011:

I was the one of the first persons to have sat along with Anna for a couple of days in his week-long fast starting from 9th August, 2003. At that time I was in the IPS and was posted as Commandant State Reserve Police Force, Mumbai and which had caused a tremendous harm to my career at that time.


It was indeed an unprecedented step taken by any serving IPS officer at cost of great harm to his career. Hardly had any IPS or IAS officer had the courage to openly align with anti-establishment activists while in service. Ironically, it has become a fashion among IAS/IPS officers to turn anti-establishment activists after retirement. [Singh’s fasting with Hazare was reported in the Times of India, June 01, 2003]....: However, after some time I realised that my way was different. Hence I decided to keep away from the April 2011 version agitation of Anna. There have been several people asking me why I did not join Anna’s agitation of April 2011. I think I owe an answer to them. Hence state my reasons as under:


Specific reasons why I kept away from Anna’s April 2011 agitation:

1)      Anna gets impressed by colour of authority – e.g. his getting impressed with Sonia Gandhi: I have been seeing for the past 8 years of my association with Anna, he is one person who gets impressed by the colour of authority. If a senior politician or minister calls up, he gets overwhelmed. One can never fight against an authority if you get impressed by his stature. His praise for Sonia Gandhi is one such example. The effect of this praise was like a pronouncement of a PR person trying to show that a corrupt government was honest.


2)     Anna rejoiced moving in government vehicles with red lamps – very demeaning to activists: After the 9th August 2003 Anna started moving in government vehicles with red lamps.....


3)     Anna accepted government hospitality and stayed in government circuit houses meant for dignitaries high in protocol: Maharashtra Government, in order to quell his voice, accorded great hospitality to the willing Anna. He would often come to Mumbai and stay in the posh government guest houses like High Mount in Malabar Hill. These guest houses were meant for government functionaries high on protocol. This was highly objectionable for an activist fighting against the Government. If an activist accepts government hospitality how can be fight against the Government. (This can be confirmed through RTI to General Administration Department, Mantralaya).


4)     To quell Anna, Government of Maharashtra accorded him de facto extra-constitutional authority to him: All limits were crossed when Anna became an extra-constitutional authority and started chairing meetings with IAS officers and other Mantralaya officials in the Chief Minister’s Conference Hall on the 6th Floor of Mantralaya, Mumbai. Secretaries and Ministers would report to Anna of the works being done by their respective department with reference to Anna’s demands. (Details of his meetings can be obtained through RTI to General Administration Department, Mantralaya).


5)     Anna’s people, many in conflict with the cause, were given office space in Mantralaya to operate from there: Many of Anna’s local associates, led by one property broker, were given separate office space in Mantralaya. Anna’s office started operating from Mantralaya against all rules. It was just like Anna’s men had started running a parallel government. A history was created when an activist like Anna Hazare, fighting against the Government, started operating from State Secretariat itself.....(This can be confirmed through RTI to General Administration Department, Mantralaya).


6)     Anna took papers from us on Adarsh so that 2 Union Ministers – Vilas Rao Deshmukh and Sushil Shinde who are involved in Adarsh Scam be removed – Suddenly Anna turned silent:
The most serious thing happened when Anna’s people kept on calling me up for giving papers on details on Adarsh scam where 2 Union Cabinet Ministers, namely, Sushil Shinde, and Vilas Rao Deshmukh were involved. I sent the papers in the hope that Anna shall seek the ouster of Vilas Deshmukh and Sushil Shinde from the Union Cabinet. However he never did so and turned mysteriously silent on demanding the ouster of the 2 Union Cabinet Ministers after taking papers and details from me.


7)     Anna took details on Lavasa Hill Station, which was declared illegal solely based on our hard work, and where it was proved on document that Supriya Sule, daughter of Sharad Pawar held 21 % shares – these shares of a company worth many thousand crores were sold later at a pittance – Anna suddenly turned silent on Pawar after taking details from us:
Anna also sought details on Lavasa where because of my diligent efforts on the legal side and along with untiring efforts [of] Medha Patkar and her co-activists, a brilliant case was made. The Central Government had to declare that the project was illegal after a PIL was prepared by me and filed by the Group of Medha Patkar. Further, there was documentary evidence to show that the daughter of Sharad Pawar, Ms Supriya Sule held 21 percent share in this very high net worth Lavasa Corporation, having thousands of acres of precious land. Most intriguingly, despite the fact that Ms Sule sold 21% share in this company of many thousand crores, her net worth remained just Rs. 42 crores! Had the transaction been true her net worth should have been at least Rs. 500 to Rs. 1,000 crores. Since Anna had taken the details from us, we expected Anna would demand Sharad Pawar’s resignation but suddenly he remained silent, leaving us in the lurch to fight the battle alone.

What Anna has been doing since 2003 is being repeated once again. Anna and his people have monopolised a committee in toto and have anchored themselves in Central Secretariat just as they did in State Secretariat earlier. Fair play and expediency commanded that Anna and his people should have been out of the committee and should have critically scrutinised the final outcome. Unfortunately, now being a part of the Government, and singing praises for Sonia, Anna has become a judge in his own case. Indeed, a grave infringement of the rules of natural justice....[4]


Recall from “Jai ho, Jan Jokepal” of Justice Sawant’s finding that Anna Hazare’s “activists” in his aptly-named Bhrashtachar Virodhi Jan Andolan Trust took bribes from supplicants, and Hazare turned a blind eye to the corruption in and extortion by his own so-called anti-corruption NGO. And this is the Anna Hazare whom “civil society” trusts to lead its war against corruption?  


Look again at his company:

There are “uncanny parallels” that make “the honourable leaders of IAC ...look like caricatures of the politicians they are taking on”.[5] Like Arun Shourie’s “eminent historians” who back scratch each other as authorities, these “civil society” activists believe their certifying each other’s integrity should be enough for lesser mortals. 


Harsh Mander was publicly called a “liar” by one of his ActionAid ex-colleagues as also, more tactfully, by the Press Council of India. Aruna Roy declared Mander’s “integrity cannot be questioned”. Mander responded by declaring Aruna Roy’s FCRA-dodging MKSS as having “no funding whatsoever” (though the MKSS website solicits and reports donations and it reports Harsh Mander’s donation to it too).[6]    


So too, forest-land-grabber Arundhati Roy for Prashant Bhushan “would vouch for his integrity anytime, anywhere”.[7] And, of course, Hazare & co., by initially announcing that they would have nothing to do with corrupt politicians in the drafting of the Lokpal bill, obviously certify as not-corrupt the government ministers they have accepted in the joint drafting committee, and by declaring they and Sonia Gandhi are on the same wavelength, they certify she is not corrupt either.


The Bhushans received in a discretionary allotment by the Mayawati government enormous plots of land at considerably less than the market value when there was a clear conflict of interest involved. Shanti Bhushan pretends naiveté: “There may be a case for a scheme like this to be cancelled”.[8]  


Hazare & co. presented to “civil society” their Jan Lokpal bill drafted by a former income tax officer with support from a former judge and two lawyers. Hazare & co. collected from “civil society” more than Rs 82 lakhs to sell this draft to “civil society” as a take-it-or-Hazare-dies Gandhian threat to the government. Of the Rs 82 lakhs, they claim to have spent Rs 32 lakhs. The remaining Rs 50 lakhs is with Kejriwal’s Public Cause Research Foundation (PCRF). Having made their money – IAC does not report any donations after April 13, 2011; PCRF does not report these at all - they begin to backtrack. In response to NAC and political pressure, they pretend they are open to wide popular consultation, to negotiating their draft, and to the eventual parliamentary will.


Justice Hegde now describes as a “perfect model” the 1968 Lokpal bill passed by the Lok Sabha in 1969. It was already in the public domain, yet he and the Bhushans were unaware of it? What does this say of the legal acumen Hazare & co. boasted of to justify the Hegde/ Bhushans nomination to the joint drafting committee? Why didn’t Hazare & co. use the Gandhian blackmail of that so-called fast-unto-death to push this “perfect” 1968/69 bill again through Parliament? The judicial system relies heavily on precedents - and Justice Hegde and the Bhushans surely know this. So, when drafting their bill, did they not look at preceding Lokpal bills, did they not look at the precedent of the Lok Sabha approval of the 1968/69 bill? Hadn’t these legal eagles done their homework - or were they persuaded by Kejriwal to go along with what he wants, and marketing which his PCRF netted Rs 50 lakhs?    


Justice Hegde wants politicians and bureaucrats brought under the Jan Lokpal. He is silent about judges being brought under it though two of his colleagues, the Bhushans, have sworn affidavits describing chief justices of India “of doubtful integrity” / ”definitely corrupt”, and a third colleague, Hazare, wants judges excluded. Kejriwal “categorically” denies the prime minister or the judiciary would be excluded from their draft.[9] 


Hazare & co. mounted a “civil society” assault with a draft Jan Lokpal bill that would take effective control of corruption away from the NAC Chair and into their Jan Lokpal, even though “Jai ho, Jan Jokepal!” cites both Hegde and Prashant Bhushan believing the real problem is maladministration, not corruption (that is, enforcement of existing laws, not creating new ones).[10]  


The Vigil book has shown unrefuted the real agenda of these self-selected “civil society” representatives as a category. Kejriwal (and Mallika Sarabhai and Medha Patkar) from Hazare & co. and Aruna Roy, AK Shiva Kumar, Harsh Mander and NC Saxena from the NAC Working Group on Transparency and Accountability feature in the book.[11]


The NAC Chair’s political activists attacked the drafters of the bill directly. Hazare & co. appealed directly to the NAC Chair who expressed solidarity with their motives. Meanwhile, her “civil society” activists within the NAC responded with oblique criticism of the draft bill but not of its drafters.  


And the drama plays on, with Sonia Gandhi still sutradhari. Observe:


“The NAC Working Group on Transparency, Accountability and Governance held its first consultation with civil society groups on the Lokpal Bill under the convenership of Smt. Aruna Roy on 4th April, 2011. The meeting discussed the draft prepared by various people’s movements and groups. After exhaustive discussions, there was consensus on most of the general principles underlying the draft Bill, though some provisions need to be examined further. The NAC WG on TA & G, will finalize the principles and framework, on the basis of this discussion.... The attendees included S/Shri/Ms: Shanti Bhushanji, Prabhat Kumar, Aruna Roy, Trilochan Sastry, Jagdeep Chhokar, Kamal Jaswal, Zaware, Santosh Hegde, Narendra Jadhav, Nikhil Dey, Shekhar Singh, Vrinda Grover, Harsh Mander, Wajahat Habibullah, Arvind Kejriwal, Swami Agnivesh, Sarvesh Sharma, Usha Ramanathan, Amitabh Mukhopadhyay, Santosh Mathew, Shanti Narain, Prashant Bhushan, Sandeep Pandey and members of the NAC Secretariat.”[12]  


Note how the NAC “civil society” activists tried to take over the drafting of the bill. That was on April 4, 2011. It didn’t work. On April 19, 2011:

“In view of the constitution of the Joint Committee comprising of Group of Ministers (GoM) and Civil Society representatives for drafting of Lokpal Bill in a time bound manner by the Government, the NAC Working Group on Transparency, Accountancy and Governance will not be dealing with this subject for the present in order to avoid duplicacy. However, it will continue to deliberate upon reforms for bringing accountability and transparency in governance.”[13]


The NAC then meets with the sutradhari chairing it:   

“Shri Harsh Mander, Member presented a broad outline of a comprehensive anti-corruption strategy highlighting (i) preventive measures such as strengthening RTI and social audits, administrative and police reforms, electoral reforms, judicial reforms, pre-legislative consultations, transparent public appointments, independent grievance redressal systems; (ii) punitive measures such as independent Anti-Corruption agency and stringent punishments; and (iii) promotional measures. It was agreed in the NAC that a Discussion Paper on the subject will be prepared by Shri Mander incorporating suggestions of other NAC members for consideration by NAC. The Council decided that the Working Group on Transparency, Accountability and Governance would work on ‘Strengthening Implementation of RTI Act and Social Auditing for Prevention and Control of Corruption’.”[14]


So, a discussion paper is to be prepared. The NAC “civil society” activists may have given up on “duplicacy” but they haven’t on duplicity. In a clever move to regain the tactical high ground, Roy and Mander “pointed out that for both the middle class and the rich corruption is only a selective issue” and “suggested that the NAC should address corruption from the poor’s viewpoint” (i.e., Hazare’s was a tamasha marketed by the mainstream media primarily to the middle class and the twitterati).[15] That was on April 28, 2011.


On April 29, 2011 Anna Hazare threatened that if the Jan Lokpal bill was not passed in the time stipulated by him there would be another “jantar mantar”, but this time he would go to jail (and not fast-unto-death - his doctors have advised him not to “skip meals”).[16] On May 4, 2011 there was the news report that Justice Hegde considered a “perfect model” a Lokpal bill that had already received its first approval by politicians as part of the system of parliamentary democracy. So what is going on? 


Jai ho, Jan Jokepal!” pointed out that under that ‘civil’ veneer affected by these activists, there are deep rifts of ego and ambition. It seems Arvind Kejriwal is trying to do a Mander. 


Harsh Mander, promoted by the mainstream English-language media, exploited Gujarat 2002 to morph himself into middle-class India’s conscience-keeper for secularism. Likewise, Kejriwal, capitalizing on middle-class revulsion over the extent of corruption unearthed in its own midst, and with the support of the same media, is leapfrogging over Baba Ramdev and Dr Subramanian Swamy to morph himself into middle-class India’s anti-corruption conscience-keeper.


The five “civil society representatives” in the joint drafting committee do not speak with one voice. Hazare and the Bhushans are being hoist with their own petard. Hegde flip-flops, and has compromised his neutrality as Lokayukta. That leaves Kejriwal, who out-manouevred Kiran Bedi and the others and appears to call the shots on the Hazare side. Kejriwal’s PCRF has also cornered the IAC money. Till May 10, 2011 neither the IAC nor the money collected by the PCRF in the IAC’s name featured on the PCRF’s official website.[17] “Hazare and company” should really be “Kejriwal and company”.


The sarkari side is represented by ministers who are Sonia loyalists and Sonia is advised by Roy and Mander. Kejriwal’s only real rival for India’s Anti-Corruption Conscience-Keeper is the ardh-sarkari Aruna Roy and, so far, he is out-manouevring her too. Roy has the Gandhi patronage, but note that Kejriwal, for all his loud anti-corruption bluster, shrewdly hasn’t said a word against Sonia Gandhi.        


Meanwhile, Baba Ramdev, after having been gulled by Kejriwal & co., has chosen to play their game. His earlier route was a relatively straight one – creating mass awareness of black-money corruption that won him lakhs of supporters and hopefully would have been converted into votes for clean politicians. Had he lent his considerable popular weight to Swamy’s demand to the PM for sanction to prosecute Sonia Gandhi, there could have been a big breach in the dam of black money corruption – and this by using the instrumentalities of our parliamentary democracy rather than by subverting it as Kejriwal & co. want to do.


Instead, Baba Ramdev has proclaimed his fast-unto-death from June 4, and declared he can go hungry for 40 days (as against Hazare declaring 10 days for himself), and has invited Hazare, Bedi and Hegde, but not Kejriwal and the Bhushans, to his satyagraha.[18] Prakash Singh has written that ”the Mahishasur of corruption is threatening to devour India” and called for a new avatar of Durga to destroy him. 


Though Congress party activists in UP optimistically portrayed Mother Sonia as Durga slaying Mahishasur as corruption, “civil society” activists explicitly rejected the Bharat Mata image that Hazare initially ventured because Bharat Mata is ”identified as a Hindu religious symbol... Bharat Mata is considered an incarnation of Devi Durga.” As “The ox calling the donkey horned” showed, Hazare agreed with them, preferring to genuflect before Mother Sonia. Why? Y.P. Singh above helps us understand.[19] 


Sri Aurobindo said “politics is the work of the kshatriya, and it is the qualities of the kshatriya (kshatra-guna) that we must cultivate if we are to be fit for freedom.”[20]


Subramanian Swamy publicly identifies, and repeatedly and fearlessly attacks the mahishasur of corruption.[21]


The Supreme Court uses words like “astonished” and ”flabbergasting” to describe just one scam that S Swamy has brought to its judicial notice.[22]  


As for Kejriwal & co., the two straightforward tests for their bona fides remain untried - that they demand the Prime Minister give sanction to Dr Subramanian Swamy to prosecute Mrs Sonia Gandhi, and that any entity - NGOs included - that receives largesse in any form from the public exchequer be brought within the purview of their Jan Lokpal Bill.


Such largesse would be cash or kind, including salary, allowance, grant, subsidy and, especially, land at discounted value, and given directly or indirectly (e.g., by or through a PSU, or received by one NGO and then funneled or made available to another). This would certainly cover Hazare’s NGOs and Bedi’s NGO, and most of the “civil society” activists named in these essays if they’ve enjoyed board/lodging/TA/DA on the government account. It may include Aruna Roy’s NGO, and it will certainly include that of her husband.


When Roy started her career as a professional activist, she joined her husband in his NGO at Tilonia. Even after she started her own NGO, she enjoyed, as the Vigil book notes, a large government-gifted property in Rajasthan available to her for her use and that of her family and friends - “In 1972, forty-five acres of Government land and an abandoned Tuberculosis Sanatorium (consisting of 21 buildings) was leased from the Government at Re.1 a month, to serve as a campus” for her husband’s NGO. One rupee a month for 45 acres and 21 buildings.  And one of the buildings conveniently became the home for the Roy family and their personal guests.[23] 


So, her husband’s NGO (with its capacious house for their old age) will come under the purview of the Jan Lokpal. As will numerous other NGOs with well-connected promoters who received start-up capital or land at discounted value or grants or subsidies at the cost of the public exchequer. As will the Rajiv Gandhi Foundation. As will Sonia Gandhi.


In the war against corruption, Aruna Roy and the other “civil society” activists named here are quislings. If Subramanian Swamy makes it too hot in India for Sonia Gandhi, she can always do a fujimori and flee to Italy. But to where will the quislings flee when the Jan Lokpal turns to devour them? 


The Supreme Court, in reference to corruption, said “ultimately retrospection has to be done by people themselves.”[24]  


Now, people, do you understand why Aruna Roy says the Kejriwal bill could become a Frankenstein’s monster?



1. “Jai ho, Jan Jokepal!” - http://www.vigilonline.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1513&Itemid=1  [expanding and updating “The company that Hazare keeps” - http://www.vijayvaani.com/FrmPublicDisplayArticle.aspx?id=1721] ;  “Caesar’s wife must be above suspicion” - http://www.vijayvaani.com/FrmPublicDisplayArticle.aspx?id=1743 ; The ox calling the donkey horned : Il bue che dà del cornuto all’asino - http://www.vijayvaani.com/FrmPublicDisplayArticle.aspx?id=1750 .

2. http://indiatoday.intoday.in/site/story/all-not-in-favour-of-anna-hazares-bill/1/135499.html . Of course, Roy herself in her public posturing is accountable to no one - http://www.vigilonline.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=970&Itemid=1&limit=1&limitstart=5 .

3. http://ibnlive.in.com/generalnewsfeed/news/hc-notice-to-centre-rajiv-gandhi-foundation/669565.html .

4. from the India TopCop webgroup, quoted partly in JD Sharma, http://www.vigilonline.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1530&Itemid=1, and in full in an email dt. 28/4/11.

5. Tony Joseph, http://www.indianexpress.com/news/the-faces-in-the-mirror/783243/0 . 

6. http://www.vigilonline.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=970&Itemid=1 ; http://www.mkssindia.org/about-us/donations/http://www.mkssindia.org/about-us/audited-financial-accounts/ .

7. http://www.hindu.com/2011/04/30/stories/2011043069640400.htm .               

8. http://www.indianexpress.com/news/bhushans-get-two-prime-plots-from-mayawati-govt-for-a-song/778490/0 , reminiscent of Arundhati Roy’s occupation of notified forest land in Madhya Pradesh - http://www.hvk.org/articles/0503/164.html .  See also Sandhya Jain, http://www.vijayvaani.com/FrmPublicDisplayArticle.aspx?id=1749 .   

9. http://www.dailypioneer.com/336167/Lokpal-Bill-of-68-ideal-Team-Anna.html ; http://www.sify.com/news/joint-drafting-committee-on-lokpal-bill-meets-for-first-time-news-national-leqlObjfhfa.htmlhttp://www.rediff.com/news/slide-show/slide-show-1-hazares-team-making-a-mockery-of-democracy/20110420.htm ; http://www.scribd.com/doc/37841587/Prashant-Bhushan-s-Affidavit-in-SC ; http://www.scribd.com/doc/37842301/Shanti-Bhushan-s-Affidavit-in-SC .

10. Prashant Bhushan also says it is economic liberalization that is the root cause of corruption (and, therefore, we must go back to the days of social control, with these self-selected “civil society representatives” as the controllers?) - http://www.indianexpress.com/story-print/783774/ ; Hegde says “that 90 per cent of his time as Lokayukta was allocated in responding to the people’s problems of maladministration and poor governance and only 10 per cent in attending to cases of corruption” - http://www.hindu.com/2011/04/26/stories/2011042661420800.htm

11http://www.vigilonline.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=843&Itemid=109 .

12. http://nac.nic.in/transparency/lokpal.htm, italics added.  Aruna Roy and her MKSS (with Nikhil Dey), Shekhar Singh, Harsh Mander, Arvind Kejriwal and Sandeep Pandey illuminate chs 7 to 9 and Appendices 11 and 12 of the Vigil book. 

13. http://nac.nic.in/press_releases/19_april_2011.pdf, italics added.

14. http://nac.nic.in/press_releases/28_april_2011.pdf .

15. http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2011-04-29/india/29486605_1_lokpal-bill-sonia-s-nac-judicial-accountability-bill ; “A Dalit leader, talking on corruption in Jaipur a few days ago, commented that the middle-class, which assists the giving and taking of bribes, is doing its ‘prayaschit’ at Jantar Mantar with havans and bhajans” – Aruna Roy, quoted at http://www.rediff.com/news/slide-show/slide-show-1-why-they-wont-let-hazares-campaign-to-succeed/20110420.htm ; “See our nation is by and large a nation of corrupt people. When I say this I am talking of the bulk of the urban class. There is no denying it. But, the fact of the matter is that even those people who are beneficiaries of the corrupt system are getting fed up with it,” – Devinder Sharma, http://devinder-sharma.blogspot.com/2011/04/india-against-corruption-we-did-not.html . “I was among a score of people invited to participate in a discussion on the Jan Lok Pal bill in one of the committees of the National Advisory Council (NAC). It wasn’t a worthwhile experience to talk about. The people who organised the discussion appeared to be speaking the same language as that of the sub-committee appointed by the Prime Minister….. This was unfortunate and was more out of the negative feeling (and outrage among those who think they only represent the civil society) of being left out…If they were included, everything would have termed as democratic. I don’t know when will civil society leaders discard their unsustainable egos...” – Devinder Sharma, http://www.countercurrents.org/dsharma240411.htm . Sharma is one of the IAC “founders”.  His first-hand accounts show that the Ramdev phenomenon was a greater draw than the Hazare phenomenon – “a clincher. His huge following certainly helped in turning the tables”. Events make clear the “secular” unacceptability of this to Kejriwal.  

16. http://in.news.yahoo.com/ready-jantar-mantar-again-lokpal-bill-not-passed-181000726.html ; http://www.mid-day.com/news/2011/apr/280411-news-pune-Anna-Hazare-treatment.htm

17. http://www.countercurrents.org/dsharma240411.htm ; http://www.rediff.com/news/slide-show/slide-show-1-interview-how-the-anna-hazare-movement-was-born/20110422.htm , http://www.rediff.com/news/slide-show/slide-show-1-interview-how-the-anna-hazare-movement-was-born/20110422.htm ; http://devinder-sharma.blogspot.com/2011/04/india-against-corruption-we-did-not.html ; It is interesting that Kejriwal was of the income tax service and his wife still belongs to it and is posted in the Serious Fraud Investigation Office of the Ministry of Company Affairs.   Aruna Roy says “the need of the hour was to create a strong office of Lokpal that would be able to deal effectively with `big scams, big financial crimes’“ - http://www.indianexpress.com/story-print/783774/ . Because, is Roy insinuating, that public officials like Kejriwal’s wife are lax in their anti-corruption duty?

18. http://www.hindu.com/2011/05/05/stories/2011050568841900.htm ;

http://www.dailypioneer.com/336353/Baba-Ramdev-to-fast-unto-death-over-black-money.html .

19. Prakash Singh, “Mashishasur of Corruption”, Eternal India (India First Foundation), April 2011:3-4 ; http://www.telegraphindia.com/1060809/asp/nation/story_6587953.asp ; http://www.deccanherald.com/content/153731/symbol-hazares-movement.html . Of course, “secularists” had no objection that MF Husain painted Indira Gandhi as Durga slaying Jayaprakash Narayan - http://bharatabharati.wordpress.com/2010/03/15/the-hindu-editor-ram-and-m-f-husains-right-to-debase-hindu-goddesses-hilda-raja/ .

20. NS Rajaram, http://newsgram.com/2011/05/bin-laden-how-a-great-power-acts/ .

21. e.g., http://www.dailypioneer.com/309011/Call-Sonia-to-the-dock.html .

22. http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4429400474217380163# ; http://www.psuindia.in/psu-news/3516-2g-scam-sc-astonished-psu-banks-gave-huge-loans-to-licencees ; http://www.moneycontrol.com/news/current-affairs/money-involved2g-scam-flabbergasting-sc_538814.html .

23 http://www.vigilonline.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=970&Itemid=1&limit=1&limitstart=5 ; http://www.barefootcollege.org/abo_history.asp .

24. http://www.moneycontrol.com/news/current-affairs/money-involved2g-scam-flabbergasting-sc_538814.html ; and add “Loot le India” – e.g., http://www.wealltrader.com/film-loot-le-india-6905.aspx - to the widely-circulating “bhrast-achar”, “new accounting terminology” and “7 scam maff” emails - e.g., http://www.flickr.com/photos/13505613@N06/5539172796/ , http://www.binscorner.com/pages/n/new-accounting-terminology-with-immediat.html and http://mymasalastuff.blogspot.com/2011/03/7-scam-maff.html cited in “Jai ho, Jan Jokepal!”.


The author is a retired civil servant and co-editor of “NGOs, Activists & Foreign Funds: Anti-Nation Industry” (Chennai: Vigil Public Opinion Forum, 2007)

User Comments Post a Comment

Back to Top