Go for the masterminds

Sadly, the lack of will in unearthing the truth continues despite the Supreme Court’s admonition of the “ineffective and directionless probe.” The court began actively monitoring the case and scrutinising the progress of the police investigation following The Hindu’s March 2011 expose of the secret U.S. diplomatic cable (accessed through WikiLeaks) that strongly suggested that money was indeed used to purchase votes. The basis of the writ petition filed by former Chief Election Commissioner J.M. Lyngdoh and others in the Supreme Court draws on this expose. While the flurry of arrests may give the impression that the police are finally serious about proceeding with the case, they seem to be going after either the smaller fish or the red herrings. Much of the evidence on cash-for-votes is in the public domain. The BJP MPs waved wads of currency notes before placing them on the table of the House; a television channel secretly filmed the bribery attempt, and the recordings were submitted to the Lok Sabha Speaker. What the police need to investigate and determine is at whose behest the bribery operation was carried out, and what was the source of the cash. Shockingly, they don’t seem to be in any hurry to do this.

In any criminal investigation, the police have a considerable amount of discretion about the manner in which evidence is gathered, sifted, and corroborated. While much of this is done outside public view, carrying out arrests sends a clear signal about the direction in which an investigation is proceeding. The fresh round of arrests in the cash-for-votes case only strengthens misgivings about the Delhi police’s sincerity in getting to the bottom of the case. Yes, there is evidence that points to the involvement of former Samajwadi Party general secretary Amar Singh, who was arrested on Tuesday, in the bribery scandal. It was his aide Sanjeev Saxena, arrested two months ago, who was caught on camera giving money to BJP MPs to purchase votes to save the UPA government in the crucial 2008 floor test. But surely Mr. Singh could have only been acting on behalf of those who directly benefited — namely, those in power at the time? The arrest of the two BJP MPs, Fagan Singh Kulaste and Mahavir Singh Bhagora, raises another question. Shouldn’t the focus be on those who attempted to bribe Opposition MPs rather than on those who blew the whistle on this? Both Mr. Kulaste and Mr. Bhagora were part of a carefully planned sting, which involved setting up traps and secretly filming the payoffs. It defies logic that an investigation into a bribery scandal can be more concerned with the whistleblowers than with those who masterminded the bribe-giving.