'Disqualification Bill passage is opportunistic'

New Delhi, May 19: National Democratic Allaince (NDA) Convenor George Fernandes today said the passage of Parliament prevention of Disqualification Bill allowing parliamentarians to hold on to office-of-profit smacked of opportunism as it rationalised something patently wrong and unconstitutional.

Speaking to newspersons, Mr Fernandes said the Bill facilitated all those who had overstepped propriety and ethics without bothering to examine the ramifications of such acts. It is necessary to bring back ethics to Parliament.

He said among the offices exempted from office-of-profit was the Chairmanship of Indira Gandhi National Centre for Arts (IGNCA) occupied by Dr Kapila Vatsayan, a former Member Secretary-cum-trustee. She chose to violate the declaration as a trustee and held on to the post for 13 long years when she should have retired after ten years changing the trust deed illegally and declaring herself and Congress president Sonia Gandhi as life-time trustee and life-time president.

Even today she holds office when a PIL questioning her appointement is pending is the High Court, he added.

Mr Fernandes said Ms Vatsayan, abusing her proximity to the ''ruling family'', had comitted various financial irregularities having ramifications worth hundreds of crores of rupees and added the government was not allowing the Comptroller and Auditor General to report on the three buildings estimated at Rs 800 crore for which huge fees were paid to the architect Ralp Lerner in foreign exchange. He added no work regarding the building had taken place even after 18 years.

There was no audit before 1995 by the CAG as the trust was run as a 'feifdom' of Mrs Gandhi and Dr Vatsayan, he alleged. The CAG had indicted the IGNCA for lack of transperancy and the entire process was conducted under the direct supervision of Dr Vatsayan and the report was prevented form reaching Parliament, he said.

Mr Fernandes, who dominated the proceedings in Parliament for decades from the Opposition benches, said he sat through the debate on this issue with material to demonstrate that a collosal amount of money and the resultant corruption was also an integral part of the office-of-profit.

He said he wanted to present the details to Parliament but could not do so as the JD(U) had already used the time allotted to the party.

Asked if the JD(U) was ignoring him after he demitted the presidentship of the party, he said ''not at all''.

The leader said he could not speak in Parliament because another party member spoke during the allotted seven minutes. However there was no discussion within the JD(U) on the views to be put forward although the party decided to oppose the bill and to walk out from the Parliament, he added.

When a reporter asked if he was floating another political outfit because he was removed from the presidentship of the JD(U), Mr Fernandes said all this is media speculation.

''All will have to work for the party,'' he added.

UNI

Related Stories