Jayalalithaa asset case: The buck stops with election panel and taxmen

How come your assets soared to stratospheric levels of Rs 66.65 crore from Rs 2.01 crore between 1991 and 1996 was the long and short of Subramanian Swamy’s charge against Jayalalithaa, the then chief minister of Tamil Nadu whose present reign ended yesterday after the trial court at Bangalore upheld Swamy’s charge. It was an open and shut case, with the law stacked against her – reverse jurisprudence.

The general law of the land is one cannot be treated as guilty unless the prosecution establishes through cogent evidence that the person in the dock is indeed guilty. However, under the Prevention of Corruption Act – perhaps the only sensible piece of legislation made by Parliament against its own tribe – a public servant is deemed to be guilty unless s/he is able to prove that s/he is not.

Jayalalithaa obviously couldn’t convince the Court of her innocence.

There is a lesson for the country from this verdict – use the Prevention of Corruption Act to punish those at high places indulging in corruption and taking advantage of what the contestants to Parliament and assembly elections have stated in their affidavit filed before the Election Commission in the run up to elections.

It seems neither the EC nor the income tax department bestirs to take advantage of such declarations though the media often brings to light the apparent lack of explanation or rationale for increase in assets of politicians.

BSP leader Mayawati’s disclosures were a case in point – her disclosure of Rs 130 crores in a short career as politicians raised eyebrows all right but not any official hackle.

One hopes the two authorities would wake up and lead a probe into the disclosures made by the contestants to their logical conclusion. To be sure, not all appreciations can be assailed – some of the appreciation in the value of assets indeed is due to the inflation factor and the phenomenal appreciation in the real estate valuations. Ditto for gold and jewelry. But it is the job of the official valuers to sift the grain from chaff.

But then not all politicians offer their heads on the chopping block; they use the institution of benami to the hilt. There are wily politicians who have mastered the art of holding assets in India benami and stashing away cash through hawala in banks in salubrious climes like Switzerland, Cayman Islands, Seychelles, Mauritius etc.

Their bluff can be called only if the country enacts a meaningful anti-benami law with real teeth and enlists international cooperation so that no Indian dares to thumb his or her nose atthe law by taking advantage of apparent lack of jurisdiction of the Indian authorities abroad.

The NDA-I government was stymied and frustrated in its Bofors case by the Swiss government. One hopes the recent international resolve expressed by the OECD nations to usher in international cooperation against flight of illegal capital from home countries is carried to its fruition.

The international community needs to rise as a phalanx as much against financial terrorism as it has often against mindless wars and killings by terrorist organisations.