#dnaEdit: Probe all parties

Despite the BJP banking heavily on the controversy around the Aam Aadmi Party receiving Rs2 crore in political funding from dubious companies, it may not be enough to hurt the AAP’s electoral prospects. For one, the BJP, ruling at the Centre, and armed with a host of investigative agencies, is yet to explicitly express its intention of carrying out a proper probe. Instead, the party and government are merely echoing the allegations raised by a group of disgruntled former AAP workers. Finance minister Arun Jaitley has accused the AAP of money laundering, but not pressed the Enforcement Directorate under his charge to probe the transactions. It is not in the capacity of any private citizen who receives a cheque or a money transfer, to investigate the antecedents of the person or entity that makes the payment. As the minister concerned, Jaitley, rather than using the media as a vehicle to disseminate the allegation, should have probed the matter without delay. More ludicrous is commerce minister Nirmala Sitharaman’s statement that a “thief should not decide who should investigate him”. It does not behove Union ministers to behave like opposition politicians; resorting to name-calling and mindless accusations hurts the credibility of the likes of Jaitley and Sitharaman who hold crucial portfolios in the Narendra Modi government.

The question why political parties have not replicated the AAP’s funding model — the moot question — is not being addressed. Even the AAP’s rivals will admit that the party’s donation system is the most transparent one in vogue in India. By encouraging cheque and online donations and publishing basic donation details on its website without compromising donor privacy, the AAP has advanced the cause of alternative politics. It is another matter that no other political party is even entering the discourse on political funding. Interestingly, neither the BJP nor the AAP had submitted their election expenditure accounts to the Election Commission for the 2013 Delhi assembly polls by January 15. The AAP was unrecognised at that time but that is no excuse against proactively submitting accounts. However, where the AAP appears to have slipped up is in its claim that its political affairs committee(PAC) vets all donations above Rs10 lakh. It is surprising that eyebrows were not raised at four little-known companies being able to contribute Rs2 crore. The AAP continues to be silent on whether its PAC could do the professed due diligence, in the midst of the Lok Sabha elections, during April 2014, when these contributions were made.

There is also reason to wonder whether the BJP is merely looking to corner electoral mileage at a time when opinion polls are giving the AAP an edge. Negative campaigning can prove effective in raising doubts in the minds of voters. Recall the dubious sting operation staged before the 2013 Delhi polls in which several AAP candidates were tempted with cash donations. Jaitley’s stated position makes it evident that the controversy will die a natural death after the elections. The target does not even appear to be the AAP’s moral high ground on transparent political funding. The AAP has responded by claiming it will approach the Supreme Court demanding an SIT probe into the political funding of the BJP, Congress and the AAP. It is unfortunate that the judiciary is increasingly becoming the arbiter of political reforms in the country. Rather than a media trial, the BJP and the government must use this moment of AAP’s discomfiture to seize the initiative and launch deliberations on regulating political funding. Besides proving a game-changing moment for the BJP in the Delhi elections, such measures could disrupt the organic link between black money, election expenses and crony capitalism.