Skip to main content

File RTIs to know Vohra committee on politician-babu-corporate-ciminal nexus

By Venkatesh Nayak*
On October 27, 2015, a popular English language TV news channel debated the issue of disclosure of Annexures to the NN Vohra Committee report. This 1993 report authored by the then Secretary, Union Ministry of Home Affairs and currently Governor of Jammu and Kashmir (J&K) examined the issue of the criminal-politician-businessman-bureaucrat nexus and suggested several measures to clean up the system including the establishment of a Nodal Agency to investigate such nexus. The report was tabled in Parliament on August 1, 1995, after opposition parties compelled the Indian National Congress-led Government under the leadership of the then Prime Minister Narasimha Rao to so do in the aftermath of the gruesome murder of a young woman by her politician husband – notorious as the Tandoor murder case (or the Naina Sahni murder).
The latest round of debate on the aforementioned TV news channel focuses on the alleged Annexures to the Vohra Committee report which was not shared with Parliament. Incidentally, the text of the report itself is not accessible on any official website of the Government of India. However, a reproduction of the original is accessible on the blog of a well-known RTI activist. The arrest of a notorious underworld don of Indian origin in Indonesia and his possible extradition to India to stand trial has reignited the debate about the criminal-politician-bureaucrat-businessman nexus. The core issue that I am concerned with is the alleged “Annexure(s)” to the Vohra Committee Report and the possibilities in the age of RTI.

Was Parliament shown the full report of the Vohra Committee?

In addition to old and recent media reports, there is a very authentic source which has placed crucial facts about the Vohra Committee and its report in the public domain. This is the judgement of the Supreme Court of India in the matter of Dinesh Trivedi MP & Ors vs Union of India & Ors [(1997) 4 SCC 306] where the petitioner, currently an MP in the Lok Sabha, who filed a public interest litigation suit demanding the disclosure of all Annexures and background materials of the Vohra Committee Report. Print and electronic media reports indicate that the Court granted a stay on the disclosure of these materials. This is not correct. The Apex Court categorically rejected the demand for disclosure of these documents through a judgement which has become final. This case is no longer pending in the Apex Court.
However, the text of the judgement records some very interesting facts. The first is the dispute about the actual length of the Vohra Committee report. According to the petitioners (which included the Delhi-based PILSARC and the Ahmedabad-based Consumer Education and Research Centre or CERC, both of which pioneered the demand for a national level RTI law in India way back in the 1990s before the demand for RTI became a people’s movement), a day before the Union Government tabled the Vohra Committee Report in Parliament, the Minister for Parliamentary Affairs had claimed that the report ran into 100 pages. However the report tabled in Parliament was only 115 pages long. They also pointed that the paragraphing in the document presented to Parliament was not continuous and suspected that a doctored version of the report was given to Parliament while the original report remained hidden within the lockers of the Government.
The then Home Secretary filed an affidavit before the Apex Court and annexed an “authenticated version” of the Vohra Committee report along with it. Another Annexure to the affidavit was his correspondence with the author of the report regarding the discrepancy in pagination and paragraph numbering. The errors in pargraphing were attributed to typos committed by the stenographer (the unnamed “fall guy”?). The author of the report stated that background materials used in writing the report were never annexed to it. In good faith the Hon’ble Supreme Court bought these arguments hook, line and sinker, and held that the Minister for Parliamentary Affairs might have been misinformed or misled and that there was no reason to suspect that a doctored version of the report had been tabled in Parliament.
Interestingly, in 2012, in response to an RTI application filed by noted RTI activist Subhash Chandra Agrawal, the Home Ministry replied that the Vohra Committee Report consists of 13 pages and demanded Rs. 26 for supplying a copy. However, it ignored his request for the Annexures to the Report. The Central Information Commission (CIC) ordered the Home Ministry to respond to the remaining queries within 2 weeks. According to Agrawal, the Home Ministry continues to maintain that there are no Annexures to the Vohra Committee report.

Did the Vohra Committee include any Annexures and were names mentioned in it?

The Annexure to the Vohra Committee Report was one of the bones of contention in the Dinesh Trivedi case as well. Although not phrased as “Annexures”, the petitioners in that case demanded disclosure of the background material that was presented by various Intelligence Agencies to the Vohra Committee. After waxing eloquent on the importance of people’s right to know in a democracy and the need for transparency in the functioning of the government, the Apex Court refused to order disclosure of such material in the following words:
“We are reluctant to direct the disclosure of the supporting material which consists of information gathered from the Heads of the various Intelligence Agencies to the general public. To so direct would cause great harm to the agencies involved and to the conditions of assured secrecy and confidentiality under which they function. Furthermore, it must be noted that not all of the information collected and recorded in intelligence reports is substantiated by hard evidence. Often on the basis of unverified suspicion names are thrown by people to save their own skins. Intelligence Agents are not obliged to adhere to the principles of natural justice before they compile reports of possible suspects; quite frequently, individuals are shortlisted based purely on the investigators’ hunches and surmises or on account of the past background of the suspects.
“The disclosure of these reports would lead to a situation where public servants and elected representative who, though entirely innocent, are compelled by virtue of their offices to associate with individuals whose culpability is beyond doubt, will also find themselves mired in suspicion. Such a situation would, in the long run, prove to be disastrous for the effective functioning of government. This is because it would make every governmental functionary overcautious about taking the simplest of decisions.”
The aforementioned para in the Apex Court’s judgement hints at the possibility of the background material presented to the Vohra Committee containing names of individuals. Applying the harm test to disclosure of confidential information, which was first posited by Justice PN Bhagwati, judge of the Apex Court (as he then was) in the matter of SP Gupta vsPresident of India & Ors [AIR 1982 SC 149] and now firmly embedded in most of the exemptions listed in Section 8(1) of The Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI Act), the Apex Court held that disclosure of people’s names without any firm basis for treating them as suspects would be harmful to the public interest. It would also harm the ability of the intelligence agencies to continue to work efficiently. This is a rare case where competing public interests – one in favour of transparency and others in favour of retaining confidentiality were weighed by the Court before arriving at a decision. According to the Court, the balance lay in favour of secrecy in this case.

How many copies of the Report were prepared?

According to the Apex Court, the affidavit submitted by the Union Home Secretary clearly stated that Shri N N Vohra had prepared three copies two of which were handed over to the Home Ministry and the third retained by him. The Court recorded the following portion of his correspondence with the then Home Secretary:
“15.2 I have prepared only three copies of this Report. One copy each is being submitted to MOS (IS) and HM, the third copy being retained by me. After HM has perused this Report, I request him to consider discussing further action with Finance Minister, MOS (IS) and myself. The emerging approach could thereafter be got approved from Prime Minister before being implemented. At that stage other concerned officers would be taken into confidence.”
This paragraph makes it clear that the report had been put up to the Prime Minister (PM) and the Union Finance Minister (FM). Whether more copies of the entire report with Annexures were made, is difficult to ascertain especially with the Union Government’s vague stance. However, the file notings made by the then PM and FM should still be available on file and citizens may file RTIs to obtain copies of these documents. Perhaps Shri Vohra, now Governor of Jammu and Kashmir must make his copy of the report public in the interest of putting this controversy to rest.

Will the Prime Minister’s Office now live up to its promise of transparency?

The PM has time and again publicly stated his government’s commitment to increased transparency. During the recently concluded Annual Convention organised by the CIC, he vocally supported people’s right to question government and not just seek copies of documents under the RTI Act.
In 2010, a Delhi-based NGO, Public Interest Foundation (PIF), filed an RTI application with the Union Home Ministry about the action taken by the Nodal Agency established in accordance with the recommendations of the Vohra Committee endorsed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the Dinesh Trivedi case in the following words:
“We are, therefore, of the view that the matter needs to be addressed by a body which function with the highest degree of independence, being completely free from every conceivable influence and pressure. Such a body must possess the necessary powers to be able to direct investigation of all charges thoroughly before it decides, if at all, to launch prosecutions. To this end the facilities and services of trained investigators with distinguished records and impeccable credentials must be made available to it. The Report, the supporting material upon which it is based and the unequivocal assistance of all existing intelligence agencies must be forwarded to this body.
“In time if the need is so felt, the body may even consider the feasibility of designating Special Courts to try those who are identified by it, which proposal may then be considered by the Union Government. To this end, and in the absence of any existing suitable institution or till its creation, we recommend that a high level committee be appointed by the President of India on the advice or the Prime Minister, and after consultation with the Speaker of the Lok Sabha. The Committee shall monitor investigations involving the kind of nexus referred to in the Vohra Committee Report and carry out the objectives described earlier.”
The PIO of the Home Ministry is said to have replied that the Committee had met 36 times since its constitution. Not satisfied with the reply, PIF filed a second RTI application in 2011 asking for the date of constitution of the Nodal Agency, its terms of reference and minutes of all 36 meetings. The PIO claimed that the information sought was not available with his Section. PIF’s first appeal was dismissed by invoking Section 8(1)(g and (h), namely, the exemptions relating to ongoing investigations and endangerment of the life and safety of informers who assist law enforcement officers. It is not clear whether the matter escalated to the CIC.
This brief narrative of the RTI interventions of PIF uploaded on its website ends with the following words:
“With the long-arm of justice yet to charge-sheet and prosecute many those accused, the general public has every right to know what concrete steps have been taken by the Nodal Group to reverse the disturbing trends mentioned in the Vohra Committee’s findings and whether there has been compliance to the Hon’ble Supreme Court’s judgement in toto. Sixteen years have passed, and it remains to be seen whether the government will undertake another fire-fighting exercise or sincerely carry out the mandate given by the Hon’ble Supreme Court.”
The above narrative on PIF’s website is attributed to one Nripendra Mishra. Mishra is currently the Principal Secretary to the Prime Minister. He is now in a position of sufficient authority to issue a direction from the PMO for the disclosure of information that he once demanded from the Government.
The National Democratic Alliance Government has been in power for more than 16 months now. To the best of my knowledge, there is very little information about the Nodal Agency that the Apex Court directed to be established in the Dinesh Trivedi case. Will this also remain only a “Quest for Transparency” as a prominent webpage of the PMO declares in its title? Very little information is available in the public domain about what the NDA Government did about the Apex Court’s directions during its previous tenure between 1999- and 2004.

Can the Annexures and background materials of the Vohra Committee report be disclosed under the RTI Act?

The Supreme Court’s judgement in the Dinesh Trivedi case may prove a stumbling block in the quest for the “Annexures” or the “background materials” relating to the Vohra Committee report, assuming they exist in the official records of the Central Government. Section 8(1)(b) of the RTI Act prevents a public authority from disclosing any information that is expressly prohibited by a court of law or tribunal. Now that the issue has become the subject of public debate again, there is good reason for releasing all information in public interest under Section 8(2) of the RTI Act. Moreover, the Government is at liberty to declassify all the background materials and “Annexures”, if any to the report and place them in the public domain voluntarily. Will the Central Government walk the talk of the Hon’ble PM vis-a-vis transparency? That is the billion Rupee question.

Action Point

Citizens, academics, activists and journalists interested in ending the nexus between politicians-bureaucrats-businessmen-criminals must file RTIs in large numbers with the PMO and the Home and Finance Ministries to make all information about the Vohra Committee report, its annexures/background materials and the action taken on the Apex Court’s directions in the Dinesh Trivedi case public.

*Programme Coordinator, Access to Information Programme, Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative, New Delhi

Comments

TRENDING

Mental health: We talk of poverty figures, but not increase in suicides since 2014

By IMPRI Team Highlighting  the issue of mental health and addressing the challenges involved, # IMPRI Gender Impact Studies Center (GISC) , IMPRI Impact and Policy Research Institute, New Delhi organized a panel discussion on Institutional Support for Mental Health and Wellbeing under the #WebPolicyTalk series The State of Gender Equality – #GenderGaps . The discussion was chaired by Prof Vibhuti Patel, Visiting Professor, IMPRI and Former Professor, Tata Institute of Social Sciences (TISS), Mumbai . The distinguished panel included – Prof Anuradha Sovani, Former Professor and Head, Department of Psychology, and Former Dean, Faculty of Humanities at SNDT Women’s University, Mumbai and National Core Committee member and Ethics Committee Chairperson, Association of Adolescent and Child Care India ; Dr Soumitra Pathare, Director, Centre for Mental Health Law & Policy at Indian Law Society, Pune ; Dr Swati Rane, Founder CEO at SevaShakti Healthcare Consultancy, Mumbai and Founder V

How India, Bangladesh perceive, manage Sunderbans amidst climate change

By IMRPI Team The effects of climate change have been evident, and there have been a lot of debates around the changes to be made locally to help and save the earth. In this light, the nations met at the COP 26 conference recently. To discuss this further, the Center for Environment, Climate Change and Sustainable Development (CECCSD) , IMPRI Impact and Policy Research Institute, New Delhi , organized a panel discussion on “COP 26 and Locally Led Adaptations in India and Bangladesh Sunderbans” under the #WebPolicyTalk series- The State of the Environment – #PlanetTalks . The talk was chaired by Dr Jayanta Basu, Director, Non-profit EnGIO, Faculty at Calcutta University and an Environmental Journalist, The Telegraph , ABP . The Moderator of the event, Dr Simi Mehta, CEO and Editorial Director, IMPRI , started the discussion by stressing the talk on the living conditions of people living in the Sunderbans Delta from both the countries, i.e. India and Bangladesh. According to the report

NEP: Education must shift away from knowledge, move to teaching students

Dr Anjusha Gawande* The Education sector in the globe is changing dramatically. Many manual jobs may be captured over by machines as a consequence of multiple spectacular advances in science and technology, including the machine learning, and artificial intelligence. A professional workforce, particularly one that includes mathematics, computer science, and data science, as well as multidisciplinary competencies in the sciences, social sciences, and humanities, will be in incredibly popular. As a result, education must shift away from knowledge and toward teaching students, how to be creative and transdisciplinary, and how to innovate, adapt, and process information differently in innovative and rapidly changing sectors. The education development agenda at the global level is represented in Goal 4 (SDG4) of India's 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, which was adopted in 2015. Ministry of Education has announced the National Education Policy 2020 (NEP 2020) on 29.07.2020. In J

Dishonesty, corruption, manipulation and sustainable growth of mediocrity

By Arup Mitra* The theory of mediocrity would suggest that the meritorious who are always small in number as a nature’s gift will be dominated by a vast number of mediocre as the latter cannot withstand the inferiority they suffer from. By subjugating the merit, they derive a pleasure of having established their superiority. Such processes are functional in all spheres in life though the field of art is the worst sufferer. An artist mind is most sensitive and those who are meritorious in this lot possess exceptionally different traits. This makes them more vulnerable and, on the other hand, it paves the path of the mediocre to cast their shadows all around. Unjust and strong criticisms are sufficient to detract many. In developing countries, the modes of subjugation are many. Individuals do not hesitate to take recourse to criminal means as the subconscious prevalent with vengeance, accesses easily the outlets for execution. The lack of civility and the power of money form a unique com

Migrant problem during Covid and the role of equality for cohesive development

By IMPRI Team  The covid-19 pandemic has deepened the pre-existing inequalities across socio-economic groups, the distressing images of migrants’ exposure remained attached in our minds but not a lot has changed in terms of data collection and policy making since then to understand the role of equality for cohesive development. Cohesive development also means that human beings should respect the boundaries of nature which they cross at their own peril and the peril of other living beings on earth. In lieu to this, The State of Development Discourses – #CohesiveDevelopment, #IMPRI Center for Human Dignity and Development (CHDD) , #IMPRI Impact and Policy Research Institute , New Delhi organized #WebPolicyTalk with Prof Amiya Kumar Bagchi, on The Role of Equality for Cohesive Development. The session is inaugurated by Ms Mahima Kapoor, researcher and assistant editor at IMPRI. Ms Mahima Kapoor extended her gratitude to the speaker, moderator and the discussant. The moderator for the eve

Parallel govts: How unity of various streams of freedom movements took shape in India

By Bharat Dogra  In one of the most inspiring examples of highly courageous spontaneous actions based on the unity of people, parallel governments were formed by freedom fighters in several parts of India in the course of the Quit India Movement in 1942. Although generally four such leading efforts have been identified in Satara (Maharashtra), Talcher (Odisha), Tamluk (West Bengal) and Ballia (Uttar Pradesh), there were some other smaller efforts as well such as those in Bhagalpur (Bihar) and Gurpal (Balasore, Odisha). It is very interesting to see in most of these efforts (also very significant for understanding the freedom movement) that there was constant merging of the various streams of the freedom movement, with more militant activities openly taking place with the help of quickly mobilized militias and this being combined with various constructive programs emphasized by Mahatma Gandhi such as anti-liquor efforts and anti-untouchability movements. In addition we see actions in

West Bengal police inaction in immoral trafficking case of a Muslim woman

Kirity Roy, Secretary, Banglar Manabadhikar Suraksha Mancha (MASUM) writes to the Chairman, National Human Rights Commission, on Muslim woman victim trafficking, police inaction, and need immediate rescue: I am writing to inform you about a case of illegal trafficking and profuse police inaction regarding the same of a marginalized Muslim teenager named Anima Khatun (name changed), daughter of Mr. Osman Ali. The victim and her husband had been residents of the village Daribas, under Dinhata police station Cooch Behar district since their marriage in 2014. Six months following their marriage, Anima Khatun along with her husband, sister-in-law, sister-in-law's husband as well as her in-laws shifted to Delhi in search of work. They stayed there for 2 years after which they all came back to their native village. They stayed at their native residence for about one month and then they went back to Delhi. In Delhi, Anima was in touch with her family till the next six months, after which t

Impact of climate change on Gujarat pastoralists' traditional livelihood

By Varsha Bhagat-Ganguly, Karen Pinerio* We are sharing a study[1] based learning on climate resilience and adaptation strategies of pastoralists of Kachchh district, Gujarat. There are two objectives of the study: (i) to examine the impact of climate on traditional livelihood of pastoralists of Gujarat state; and (ii) to explore and document the adaptation strategies of pastoralists in mitigating climate adversities, with a focus on the role of women in it. In order to meet these objectives, the research inquiries focused on how pastoralists perceive climate change, how climate change has impacted their traditional livelihood, i.e., pastoralism in drylands (Kr├Ątli 2015), and how these pastoral families have evolved adaptation strategies that address climate change (CC)/ variabilities, i.e., traditional livelihood of pastoralists of Kachchh district, Gujarat state. Pastoralism is more than 5,000 years old land-use strategy in India; it is practised by nomadic (their entire livelihood r

Bangladesh sets shining example of communal peace, harmony in South Asia

By Dr. Abantika Kumari Bangladesh is made up of 160 million people who are multi-religious, multi-ethnic, and multi-lingual. The Constitution of Bangladesh guarantees all citizens the freedom to freely and peacefully practice their chosen religions. Religious minorities make up roughly 12% of Bangladesh's present population, according to conservative estimates . Hindus account for 10% of the population, Buddhists for 1%, Christians at 0.50 percent, and ethnic minorities for less than 1%. As an example of how people of different religions can live together, cooperate together, and simply be together, Bangladesh is regarded. Bangladesh is a country that values religious liberty, harmony, and tolerance. Bangladesh's population is made up of a diverse spectrum of religious groupings and ethnic groups. Such communities and groups live in harmony, putting aside their differences and learning to embrace and respect the diverse and diversified culture that has contributed to Bangladesh

Political leaders' actions are causing decontextualisation of democracy

By Harasankar Adhikari In India, does democracy become a matter of prescription, i.e., to follow the footpath left? Isn't it, in some ways, the adoption of certain prescribed procedures and mechanisms, such as timely election and populist schemes for the poor, etc.? In some cases, acts of government and governance turn democracy into a myth. It is full of political party-based agendas. This continuous hegemonic practise creates a conditional situation for the people of India. People elect their representatives who are not their representatives. They are only representatives of a particular political party that nominated them in the election. Democratic decentralisation of power is undoubtedly a unique step towards the grass roots. But a Panchayat member has no free will to act without the party’s instruction and approval. Michael Saward, a political philosopher, defines democracy as a matter of correspondence in state-society relationships. But India’s parliamentary democracy is un