The Isro tragedy: Who will be held accountable for a cooked-up spy case?

Not only did the careers of Chandrasekhar, Narayanan and D Sasikumar collapse, but also the development of cryogenic engines based on Russian technology suffered, as did Indo-Russian co-operation

In a tragic turn of events, space scientist K Chandrasekhar died in hospital hours before the Supreme Court (SC) finally pronounced that the spy case in which he and five others had become embroiled had been an obvious frame-up, awarding Rs 5 million damages to former Indian Space Research Organisation (Isro) scientist Nambi Narayanan, who had been “arrested unnecessarily, harassed and subjected to mental cruelty” in 1994. Mr Narayanan, along with Chandrasekhar and others including two Maldivian women, had already been exonerated in 1998; but the fact that the entire case that roiled Kerala politics for almost a quarter of a century was almost entirely a creation of investigators has now been established beyond doubt. The casualties are many. Not only did the careers of Chandrasekhar — the Indian representative of Russian space agency Glavkosmos — and the Isro scientists in its cryogenic division — Mr Narayanan and D Sasikumar — collapse, but also the development of cryogenic engines based on Russian technology suffered, as did Indo-Russian co-operation. The fourth Indian accused, businessman S K Sharma, is terminally ill in Bengaluru. The two Maldivians, Mariam Rasheeda and Fousiya Hasan, were held by the police for almost three years. Ms Hasan told a Kerala newspaper that she was forced to confess when investigators threatened to have her 14-year-old daughter sexually assaulted if she did not. A final casualty was the career of K Karunakaran, then Kerala chief minister, who was forced to resign and never became CM again.

While the SC’s decision to award damages — a rare occurrence, and one that is not normally found in Indian jurisprudence — is understandable, the accounting for this grievous misstep cannot stop there. There must be an investigation of how these events played out, and the apex court has taken the initiative there as well. The case blew up as a method used by some politicians still active in Kerala Congress politics to discredit Karunakaran, known then as “Leader”. Karunakaran’s son points out that some of those responsible are beyond judgment now — Prime Minister P V Narasimha Rao, for example, who threw Karunakaran to the wolves. But others, including the police officials who cooked up the case, must be held responsible. The Communist Party of India (Marxist), which when in government in the state prosecuted the case beyond all reason, must also be held accountable by the people of the state. Even after the Central Bureau of Investigation declared there were no charges to answer, the Left-led state government insisted on continued investigation, and continued to hold the Maldivian women in captivity.

 
Mr Narayanan is right to demand criminal proceedings against the police officers in question. It is now up to the government to make recompense, and to ensure that such events do not occur again, by itself making the first move, and charging those who must be held responsible. The Intelligence Bureau, which led the investigative charge, must also be examined carefully. It is unfortunate that India is one of the few democracies which do not have proper Parliamentary oversight of its intelligence agencies. This case is another example of why that lack of accountability must end.