PRESS

CORRUPTION AND AAP

INQUILAB, IN ITS editorial on May 8, writes: “Following the sensational charge of accepting bribes against Delhi CM Arvind Kejriwal made by his sacked minister Kapil Mishra, it has become imperative for Kejriwal to come out with his version of the truth without any delay... AAP was the first political party that was neither formed on the basis of any ideology nor did take it the garb of any ‘ísm’. It was born out of a campaign against corruption that attracted nationwide attention. Those connected with the party would not be able to face the people if the charges of corruption against the very symbol of fight against corruption are proved.”

The paper adds: “One needs to know why Kapil Mishra did not reveal the money having been received by Kejriwal, as claimed by him, on the same day. Despite his claim of Kejriwal’s confession to him about certain political compulsions, why did he wait to be sacked before levelling charges against the chief minister... Since Mishra’s mother, Annapurna Mishra, is a senior BJP leader from Delhi, one has to see if there is someone else behind the mysterious curtain of allegations.”

Rashtriya Sahara, on May 9, writes: “The people have every right to know about the machinations and misdeeds of popularly elected governments. But is it also not necessary that the tendency to go after popularly elected governments under different pretexts or by using some insiders as instruments should be given up and an internal tug-of-war be avoided?”

PUNITIVE DIFFERENCE

THERE HAVE BEEN questions about the inconsistency between verdicts of the Supreme Court and the Bombay High Court in two similar cases of gang rape — in Delhi in December 2012 and of Bilkis Bano (then five months pregnant) during the Gujarat riots in February-march 2002. The daily Sahafat ,in its editorial on May 8, highlights the statements of some leading legal lights. According to eminent woman lawyer, Rebecca John, “the case of Bilkis Bano was of the same level of barbarity (as the Delhi case), if not more, and yet the Bombay High Court did not award the tyrants death sentences (as has been done in Nirbhaya’s case). Since I am opposed to death sentence, I cannot support such a punishment in the Bilkis Bano case. Yet, as an example, I ask why at the time of giving punishment, the judiciary does not maintain uniformity. It awards death sentence to some, but not to some others. No transparency is seen between the verdicts.” A similar view has been expressed by eminent lawyer, Prashant Bhushan, also an opponent of death sentence.

Akhbar-e-mashriq, in its editorial on May 7, writes: “The intense interest that people took in the Delhi case has not been seen in others. What could be the reason for this? Is the (flawed) mindset, hidden within our conscience, behind this matter too?... Bilkis was five months pregnant and many of her many family members — including her three-year old daughter — were killed. In fact, this crime was graver than that in the Nirbhaya case, but the perpetrators of this heinous crime were given life sentences, not death penalties.”

SIMULTANEOUS POLLS?

SIASAT, IN ITS editorial on May 1, writes: “The proposal to have elections to Parliament and state assemblies simultaneously, put forth by Prime Minister Narendra Modi many times, could have far-reaching effects. This issue is connected with the democratic structure of the country. No decision in this regard can be made on the basis of someone’s desire or on considerations of facilities in conducting elections... Any government elected by the will of the people has the right to order elections even before they are due. If the elections to Parliament and state assemblies are tied together, this right would be taken away... If the government actually wants to control the heavy expenditure on elections and prevent malpractices, it should seriously examine the proposals for electoral reforms and implement them.”

Jadeed Khabar, in its May 2 editorial, writes: “It has to be kept in view that elections are not conducted merely as an administrative formality based on certain prescribed procedures and principles. They are also dependent on the situations and developments taking place in the various states from time to time... The interest of any political party or convenience in the conduct of these elections should not be given priority in this matter. Removing the flaws in the electoral process and bringing about electoral reforms are the need of the hour. Without such steps, malpractices (including foul use of money) cannot be checked whether elections are held simultaneously or separately.”

Compiled by Seema Chishti