CASH-FOR-VOTE SCAM REPORT

                                                                                                        CPI(M) MP's Note Of Dissent

Mohd Salim, deputy leader of CPI(M) in Lok Sabha and member of the committee to enquire into the complaint made by some MPs regarding alleged offer of money to them in connection with voting on motion of confidence brought by Manmohan Singh government in July 2008, submitted the following note of dissent to the committee's main report.

I REGRET that despite efforts put by all of us to evolve a consensus and arrive at unanimity on such an important issue which has great impact on our parliamentary system in particular and our people in general who elect the Lok Sabha members with great expectations, we failed to do so.

It is a matter of great concern that money power is playing havoc with the system. The current episode shows how illegal money is being used on an unprecedented scale to vitiate the democratic system. When fundamental policy issues are being sought to be decided through allurement and offers of huge amount, it is not difficult to understand how the common man�s common issues such as poverty, unemployment, price-rise, inflation, illiteracy, better educational facilities are going to be addressed by the parliament. It will be most unfortunate, if we fail to uncover the truth behind the �Cash for Vote� and the culprits remain at arms length due to lack of political will.

Introduction

The offer of money to some members in connection with voting on the motion of confidence or the �trust vote�, display of wads of currency notes on the floor of the parliament which were offered to buy votes, allurements and announcement of floor crossing in press conferences on the eve of the trust vote and finally, largescale defection and cross voting including abstention, were all in full public view and these were seen as a grievous blow to the parliamentary system of the country by concerned citizens. It was rightly pointed out by the speaker immediately after the incident as a very �sad day in the history of parliament�.

What was witnessed by everyone was, however, only the tip of the iceberg. There were dubious activities by wheeler-dealers to mobilise votes by any means. The perpetrators of such acts do not generally leave behind the marks of their misdeeds. Therefore, it needs political courage and will to uncover such sordid activities to reach to the bottom of the truth and bring it out before the public. This was needed to save this great institution of parliament.

If we minutely go through the issues raised, the information collected, the witnesses examined or not examined and the submissions made in the proceedings, particularly the CDs submitted by various parties, most of the moves were to bring in extraneous issues rather than concentrating on the core issue and making a determined effort to uncover the truth. A great deal of time and energy was lost to defend individuals rather than protecting the institution and to find out the truth behind the incident.

Para 10 is an example. After much persuasion, the committee agreed towards the end of its proceedings, to hear Hashmat Ali, the driver of the Zen car who was a key link in this episode. Some members� initial reluctance in summoning him for his deposition, the unusual method in which the information was sent to him to appear before the committee and finally the effort by interested persons to prevent him from making an appearance before the committee � all suggest a pattern which cannot be ignored by any one who is interested in finding out the truth. This belief has been strengthened when his written submission does not find any mention in the Report.

Findings

Para 76 � While appreciating Bardhan�s prompt and candid response in this regard, the observation made in the Para does not reflect the mood and spirit of the understanding of the committee. What he had expressed was not only anxiety and anguish, but also contained an element of prognosis, given his vast experience about the politics of the day. This is particularly in contrast to the reluctance shown by the committee to summon and critically examine the versions of four key persons in the entire episode: 1) Amar Singh, MP; 2) Ahmed Patel, MP; 3) Hashmat Ali, driver of the car; and 4) the �young man in the yellow shirt� who appeared on the CNN-IBN video tape and was seen as actively involved in assisting Sanjeev Saxena in delivering the cash.

Paras 93, 101, 113, 114, 123, 141 � It appears as if the committee is more eager to issue good conduct certificates to concerned individuals rather than being interested in finding the truth. At times, an over-eagerness to jump to conclusions, ignoring crucial circumstantial evidence, is evident.

The committee was initially not interested in examining the CDR (Call Detail Records) to corroborate the evidence provided in the tapes. The detailed CDR was subsequently made available and a close scrutiny of those calls strengthened the circumstantial evidence against Sanjeev Saxena and established his link to Amar Singh. However, the Report has not paid attention to this important aspect. Any intelligent person will be able to draw her/his conclusions if the CDR of those phones together with the timings of the call made (as recorded and alleged) are compared.

The committee tried to trace the money trail by inquiring into cash withdrawals from various banks, on the basis of currency note numbers, which in any case are not maintained by the banks. However, the finance minister had stated during a discussion on the Banking Transaction Tax, that high volume cash withdrawals can be tracked and traced through the application of the tax. This channel, which could have been invoked in this case, has not been done by the committee.

Conclusion

There is no justification in having such a lengthy write-up spreading over several paras and sub-paras with the title �Conclusion�, when it becomes clear from the brief recommendations that the committee has failed to arrive at any final conclusion. It was inter alia mentioned that the committee was handicapped due to non-availability of the technical and professional expertise in the form of personnel, machine and technology at its disposal. And as we are recommending unanimously that this matter be probed further by an appropriate investigating agency, an elaborate conclusion, which can be construed as an effort to exonerate the important and influential persons involved, is avoidable. It is better to drop this section.

Recommendations

Para 168 - It will be improper for the committee to limit the scope for further investigation and exclude some important names from the ambit of investigation by an appropriate agency. The committee should not pass any judgment on this matter and must recommend that the entire matter be probed. The committee should not appear to be partial in its approach.

Para 169 - Pending the review and change of the procedure, which has lost its justification in the present circumstances, the committee should recommend to the speaker that the cases of Amar Singh and Ahmed Patel should be referred to chairman, Rajya Sabha, so that appropriate measures to deal with their cases can be initiated.