New Delhi:
The government has made its stand clear on why PJ Thomas was selected as the country's Central Vigilance Commissioner. Home Minister P Chidambaram defended the appointment today.
The Supreme Court has questioned why Mr Thomas was picked as the country's senior-most officer in charge of fighting corruption despite the fact that he had been chargesheeted in a case of corruption.
Mr Thomas was selected in September 2010 by a three-member committee that was headed by the Prime Minister, and included the Home Minister and the Leader of Opposition, Sushma Swaraj.
The case against Mr Thomas accuses him of sanctioning the import of edible oil - Palmolein - from Malaysia in 1991 when he was Food Secretary in the Kerala government. The prices paid for the oil were later declared unjustifiable.
Ms Swaraj had protested publically and aggressively against Mr Thomas' selection. Acknowledging this, Mr Chidambaram said that at a meeting in September, the Palmolein case was extensively discussed by the PM, him and Ms Swaraj.
Explaining the decision to select Mr Thomas, the Home Minister said, "She (Swaraj) made her points, the other members (PM and HM) of the Committee made their points. It was brought to the notice of the Committee during the discussion that although the case was registered, no sanction of prosecution was granted by the NDA government from December 1999 to May, 2004 and by the UPA government subsequently."
When a reporter asked why the government chose a candidate who had been chargesheeted, Mr Chidambaram said, "I respect your right to hold a point of view similarly you should also respect our point of view. The matter is actively subjudice."
Mr Thomas appointment as CVC has been challenged with a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) in the Supreme Court. So far, the hearings have left the government blushing, with the government scrambling to explain why the case against Mr Thomas was overlooked.
At the last hearing, the court asked if the committee that selected Mr Thomas had seen the documents relevant to the corruption charges against him. The Attorney General, GE Vahanvati, denied this. Ms Swaraj has said that the PM and the Home Minister knew about the case, discussed it with her, and that's when she placed her dissent on record. Ms Swaraj has said she will place an affidavit with her version of events in the Supreme Court.