After 17yrs, is this all Liberhan has to say?

Justice MS Liberhan’s report simply strengthens the argument that investigations ordered under the Commission of Inquiry Act are a sheer waste of money.

It also indicates that when a commissioner presumes too much, he inevitably deviates from the terms of reference and extends his stay for many years, becoming a burden on the taxpayer. After spending Rs8 crore over 17 years, the only thing that came out of the 1,029-page report is a sweeping indictment of former prime minister  Atal Bihari Vajpayee.

Not only this, Liberhan also gave a touch of corporate jurisprudence to the investigation. According to him, there’s no need to issue notices to all leaders of a political party, which is a legal entity, to answer charges. Thus, there was no need to send Vajpayee a notice under section 8B of the Act. 

“Nobody can dispute that Mr Vajpayee is a tall leader in that party. Just as a managing director is responsible for the misdeeds of a company, a leader is responsible for the misdeeds of a party,’’ Liberhan said, to justify why it has discussed the role of a person who had not been given a chance to defend himself.

However, section 8B is clear that, “If the commission thinks it necessary to inquire into the conduct of any person; or is of opinion that the reputation of any person is likely to be prejudicially affected, the commission shall give that person a chance to appear before it and defend himself.”

Even a convict is given a chance to have his say before execution, but Liberhan has condemned a top leader of a political party without hearing his story. One grave mistake is good enough to make the report suspect in the eyes of law.

Another example shows Liberhan couldn’t understand the term ‘reference relating to   assault on mediapersons in Ayodhya’.  “The sequence of events leading to, and all the facts and circumstances relating to, the assault on mediapersons at Ayodhya on 6 December, 1992.” That was the reference. Yet, the commission, for reasons known to it, suggested setting up a statutory body to issue and cancel licenses to journalists.