President, ministers must restore people's trust in political institutions

Questions on Sushma Swaraj show that politicians should be careful about separating the personal from the public

Legitimate and important questions have been raised following a report in The Sunday Times of London that suggested that External Affairs Minister Sushma Swaraj had intervened to ensure that travel papers were made available to Lalit Modi last year. Mr Modi, who is under investigation by the Enforcement Directorate for alleged foreign exchange violations, had been the subject of a discussion between the British authorities and the previous, Congress-led United Progressive Alliance (UPA) government in New Delhi. The UPA had said that Mr Modi should not be permitted travel documents, as that would jeopardise friendly bilateral relations. But Ms Swaraj, according to the reports - the essence of which she herself has confirmed through a statement on Twitter - intervened to overturn that policy on "humanitarian grounds", as Mr Modi claimed he wished to visit his wife, who according to him was undergoing treatment in Portugal for cancer. Ms Swaraj's defenders point out that the foreign minister has had a history of making such interventions on behalf of Indian citizens, especially those stranded in foreign countries. But there is, of course, something qualitatively different about intervening to aid someone who is wanted in India for questioning on money laundering charges.

However, the additional wrinkle to the story is that Ms Swaraj's daughter, Bansuri Kaushal - an Inner Temple-trained lawyer - has appeared regularly for Lalit Modi for at least seven years. And the professional relationship between the minister's husband, Swaraj Kaushal, and Mr Modi is reported to be of even longer duration. The two appeared to be on terms easy enough that Mr Kaushal recently requested Mr Modi to help out with his nephew's college admissions. This gives the matter a more serious complexion. At the very least, Ms Swaraj should have recused herself from this specific case. She should have passed it on down to her junior minister for consideration, or alternatively to her officials. However, there appears to have been no care taken to avoid a conflict of interest. This is unfortunate and Ms Swaraj, therefore, owes public and Parliament (when it convenes) more of an explanation than has so far been forthcoming.

Read more from our special coverage on "LALIT MODI"

• Had met Lalit Modi in London, asked him to return and face the law: Sharad Pawar
• Lalit Modi has shown how rich & famous bend Indian laws
• Time for Narendra Modi to speak on the Lalit Modi-Swaraj fiasco
• Effigies of Sushma Swaraj and Lalit Modi burnt in Kolkata
• 5 things that Lalit Modi's interview tells us

In general, Ms Swaraj's predicament does tend to suggest that those in power are insufficiently careful about separating the personal from the public. Ms Swaraj should not have decided on an issue so close to her family's business interests. The questions of misuse of office run deeper - and higher. Ideally, the President of India should be the one setting a spotless example for his more fallible ministers. But even President Pranab Mukherjee, sadly, has not been as careful as he should have been in such matters. Most recently, there were reports that emails had been leaked to the media from the President's office to the corporate group Essar, asking for aid in the matter of a British visa for a relative and employment for a young man in Kolkata. Mr Mukherjee earlier surprised many by choosing to give an interview - unusual for a President - to a Swedish newspaper, which became doubly controversial after he took a stand in it on the Bofors scandal. India has just emerged from a bruising few years in which public faith in political institutions withered. The President and his ministers should help lead in restoring trust.