Letter: What's wrong with a JPC?

The editorial “PM and Parliament” (January 5) is unduly harsh on the Opposition which is insisting that a Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) be formed to investigate the 2G scam. If the Congress party quotes the Constitution to claim that the prime minister is not duty-bound to appear before a Public Accounts Committee (PAC), why should it resist the formation of a JPC under the same Constitution? Since the Constitution provides for the creation of both PAC and JPC, the logic that the PAC duplicates the role of the JPC is specious. The two have different, yet clear, roles. Similarly, to quote the failure of the earlier JPC to predict the failure of a new one is sheer speculation. If the JPCs are infructuous, the Constitution should be amended to delete the provision.

The truth is that the party is shielding the prime minister from being taken to task for neglecting a scam that took place under his nose. The editorial forgot to add that the spurt of activities by the Central Bureau of Investigation and other agencies came after the Supreme Court snub and under media pressure. The Opposition is entitled to doubt the sincerity of the government on this issue. Hence the need for a JPC.

Y G Chouksey, Pune