Rakesh Bhatnagar: Justice must be seen to be done

There’s an age-old adage that justice should not only be done but it should seem to have been done as well. The word ‘seem’ is innocent. It’s intentional as there’s a strong belief that justice isn’t possible for all the persons who are parties to a legal dispute.

The universally accepted adage must come in play even in other sphere of governance. The ‘seem’ effect must not lose its efficacy outside the corridors of judiciary.

At a time when a substantial debate is on regarding the ingredients of the proposed Lokpal Bill that is said to be the outcome of the sustained deliberations among five non-government members and the five who are ministers and happen to be eyes, ears and hands of the UPA -II government.

One of its influential members, Kapil Sibal, who succeeded jailed Telecom Minister A Raja, has asserted that the bill is ready and would be placed before parliament for a debate. The other five members have strong differences with the governmental ideology on the mechanism to deal with the corrupt.

That  the drafting of the bill  was possible due to the public outcry against a large section of the corrupt governance and different organs of the State, exceptions, if at all any, apart. The government agreed to sit across the table with the corruption affected lobby to cull out an efficient law to set up the authority of ombudsman.

Since the government has been busy giving an impression that a bill has been drafted to this effect and that would soon take the legislative route, it would be desirable that the ‘seeming’ effect must also be taken into account.

Why can’t the five members of the panel who are in the union cabinet—Pranab Mukherjee (finance), P Chidambaram (home), Kapil Sibal (HRD and telecom), Salman Khursheed (Law) and M Veerappa Moily (corporate affairs) – remain absent when the draft bill is considered by Prime Minister Manmohan Sigh and his cabinet? Their absence can’t be taken as a far-fetched proposition. In fact, attorney general Goolam E Vahanvati had sought quashing of a PIL that challenged the setting up of the committee in somewhat like private -public partnership pattern.

It was also pointed out that Anna Hazare and his team members were not at par with the government. There’s complete uniformity in the status of the members. They are equal, it was pointed out.

But that’s not correct. The five ministers would discuss the bill at the cabinet meeting whereas the other five would be left to resort to the Gandhian form of protest. Justice can’t be done to all the parties but it can seem to have been done, Mr Prime Minister!