T.N.: A balancing act?

By Our Special Correspondent

NEW DELHI, JULY 10. The Union Cabinet today held an informal discussion on the ticklish question whether Central Ministers enjoy any immunity, if at all, from the officers superintending law and order, a State subject. The matter was raised by Mr. T.R. Baalu, who along with Mr. Murasoli Maran, was arrested on June 30 in Chennai by the Tamil Nadu police.

Three questions were raised in the context of the judicial probe announced by the State Government into the police ``excesses'' on June 30. Can a State Government, on its own, institute a judicial probe into the conduct of a Central Minister? Second, should the Central Ministers respond to the ``summons'' from a State Government-appointed probe? And, third, if there is a dispute over a judge between a State Government and a Central Minister, should there be a neutral arbitrator?

A number of Ministers, including those from Bihar, joined the discussion spiritedly. Recently, Mr. Laloo Prasad Yadav had warned the Union Ministers from Bihar to ``behave''. Otherwise, the same treatment would be meted out to them as was meted out to Mr. Maran and Mr. Baalu.

It was noted that the lesson from Tamil Nadu was that Central Ministers (or for that matter State Ministers) were at the mercy of an unfriendly State Government.

It was pointed out that no penal action could be initiated against an IAS or IPS officer without ``sanction'' from the Centre; similarly, judicial functionaries also enjoyed immunity from arbitrary action by a hostile local administration.

But Central Ministers were without such protection. The consensus was that there should be some kind of guidelines, applicable both to State Governments and Central Ministers.

Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Section  : Front Page
Previous : Prices of wheat, rice slashed by 30 per cent
Next     : India ready for a long haul