Rahul’s outburst against ordinance served public purpose, says Hegde
4 Oct 2013 5:17 AM IST
Retired Supreme Court Judge N Santosh Hegde said on Wednesday Congress leader Rahul Gandhi’s denunciation of the ordinance on convicted lawmakers has served public purpose though he may have made the statement for his party’s benefit on the back of adverse public opinion.
‘I am glad that it’s not fructifying (ordinance is in the process of being withdrawn) for whatever reason’, the former Karnataka Lokayukta said.
‘Rahul Gandhi may have made the dramatic statement in a different context..may be for the benefit of the party and to wriggle out of the public opinion. But, ultimately, it has served the public purpose (forcing the government to withdraw the ordinance)’, he said.
Arguing that the ordinance is ‘worse’ and the bill in this regard should not have been moved, Hegde asked as to how Parliament can say that elected representatives are different from public servants found guilty of corruption.
‘We can’t have two types of corruption – one by elected representatives and another by public servants’, he remarked. The ordinance is only aimed at ‘keeping themselves’ (elected representatives) in power, Hegde said, hailing the Supreme Court verdict on convicted lawmakers.
‘Recently, I think the Supreme Court has been a little proactive in this regard. I think it should continue to be so,’ he said.
‘Disqualification will be deterrent for many people,’ Hegde added.
He said corruption has been an issue in the country and would continue to remain so but there is no seriousness on the part of people in power to eradicate corruption or control it to a certain extent.
‘I am glad that it’s not fructifying (ordinance is in the process of being withdrawn) for whatever reason’, the former Karnataka Lokayukta said.
‘Rahul Gandhi may have made the dramatic statement in a different context..may be for the benefit of the party and to wriggle out of the public opinion. But, ultimately, it has served the public purpose (forcing the government to withdraw the ordinance)’, he said.
Arguing that the ordinance is ‘worse’ and the bill in this regard should not have been moved, Hegde asked as to how Parliament can say that elected representatives are different from public servants found guilty of corruption.
‘We can’t have two types of corruption – one by elected representatives and another by public servants’, he remarked. The ordinance is only aimed at ‘keeping themselves’ (elected representatives) in power, Hegde said, hailing the Supreme Court verdict on convicted lawmakers.
‘Recently, I think the Supreme Court has been a little proactive in this regard. I think it should continue to be so,’ he said.
‘Disqualification will be deterrent for many people,’ Hegde added.
He said corruption has been an issue in the country and would continue to remain so but there is no seriousness on the part of people in power to eradicate corruption or control it to a certain extent.
Next Story
