Law ministry releases letter seeking Chawla's ouster

In a curious case of the right hand not knowing what the left was doing, the law ministry has released the letter written by then Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) N Gopalaswami to the President, seeking removal of fellow Election Commissioner Navin Chawla, while the Rashtrapati Bhawan had declined to make the document public.

The appellate authority under the Right to Information Act in the law ministry allowed the request of S S Ranawat, a resident of Bhilwara in Rajasthan, for the unprecedented recommendation made by Gopalaswami in January last year. The Rashtrapati Bhawan had cited Chawla’s opposition to the disclosure as a reason for not making it public.

In his 93-page report, Gopalaswami had cited several instances of “partisan behaviour” on the part of Chawla who had shown “lack of political neutrality”.

Acting on a petition filed by Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leader L K Advani and 179 other Members of Parliament who had levelled accusations of “political partisanship”, the then CEC had contended that he had powers under the Constitution to recommend Chawla’s removal. The government, however, rejected it and appointed Chawla as CEC.

In this regard, Gopalaswami cited Chawla’s own notings on another occasion that the CEC had the power to make such a recommendation.

In the recommendation to the President, the then CEC had said he had concluded that “significant facts” and “irresistible conclusions” from the report submitted by him were crucial in adjudging the suitability of Chawla as EC.

He said in his considered opinion, Chawla’s continuation as Election Commissioner was “not justified”.

“My recommendation is, therefore, under the powers vested in me under the second proviso to Article 324(5) of the Constitution, is to remove Navin B Chawla from the post of Election Commissioner,” Gopalaswami had said in his letter dated January 16, 2009, a few months before the general elections during which he demitted office.

Referring to 12 instances cited by him, he said: “Taken individually (they) appear to indicate Chawla’s political partisanship. Collectively, they point to a continuity of consistent thought and action in furthering the interest of one party with which he appeared to be in constant touch raising serious doubts about his political detachment.”

“Further, it was not only that he appeared to be lacking in political neutrality but more pernicious were his attempts to influence Election Commissioner Quraishi, not by dint of valid arguments, but by spreading stories that Quraishi was supporting the opposite views,” he added.