Those were days when public men quit posts as the slightest hint of any accusation of wrong doing. Along with the general slide in the moral fibre of the nation persons developed different perspectives.
Two incidents have recently been reported in press.
First, a Union Minister had allegedly instructed his staff (of educational institutions owned by him) to insist on a minimum capitation fee for admission to medical college in blatant violation of Hon'ble Supreme Court's orders. This isssue died a natural death with TOI, which broke the news, itself failing to follow it up. They should atleast publish a denial and apology.
Second and more recent, a Union Minister had allegedly tried to influence the Bench in the case of granting bail. The Hon'ble Judge had gone on record though he stopped short of naming the individual.
During the debate in the Parliament, there is no reaction it appears from the Treasury benches. Though it is the absolute right of a Minister or Member to speak or not on a particular subject, silence sends wrong signals.
Where there is a gap between Law and Justice, Justice should prevail. Morality should be higher than mere rules and regulations. Either there should be a flat denial and vindication of the character of the individual and the will to face consequences so that truth prevails or there should be exemplary action. No need for a cumbersome enquiry. The pleasure of the President on the recommendations of the PM should be sufficient.
Otherwise credibility of the system stands to ridicule.
...ponder
No comments:
Post a Comment