NDA Memorandum to President of India on Navin Chawla issue dated April 08, 2006

Hon'ble President of India,
Sh. A.P.J. Abdul Kalam,
Rashtrapati Bhawan,
New Delhi.

Your Excellency,

It is becoming increasingly evident that all constitutional norms are being flouted with impunity by the UPA government to shield Sh. Navin Chawala, the member of the Election Commission so that his services can be used for partisan purposes. It is to be recalled that on March 16, 2006 a comprehensive memorandum was submitted to you signed by 205 Members of Parliament to take action against Sh. Navin Chawala because in view of his very close proximity to the Congress Party he was not expected to act in a free and fair manner and there was a very reasonable basis of bias in his conduct. In the two trusts managed by him and his wife a huge amount of Rs. 95 lacs has been donated by leading Congress members of Parliament from their MPLADS fund. Huge area of costly land running into crores were given by Congress governments in Delhi and Rajasthan (of Ashok Gahlot) for a pittance to these trusts.

What is truly alarming is that the Prime Minister is willing to go to any extent to make compromises to save Sh. Navin Chawala. All our apprehensions have come true in this regard. This is evident from the manner in which the above complaint forwarded by you to the Prime Minister has been dealt with. The Prime Minister much less the Attorney General has no role at all in this as under Article 324(5) of the Constitution it is the Chief Election Commissioner alone who has the sole constitutional; jurisdiction to recommend any action to the President.

The above complain was submitted to you, as stated on March 16th and was forwarded to the Prime Minister on March 20th by him. It is indeed curious that the Prime Minister is sitting over this even though he has no role at all. We are surprised that instead of sending the complain immediately the Prime Minister is reportedly taking the advise of the Attorney General even though the matter is not of legality but of propriety relating to his continuance. The issue is being unnecessarily diverted. The past conduct of Sh. Navin Chawala cannot be divorced from his present status as a member of the Election Commission because he cannot be expected to act in an unbiased manner.

Now further evidence is coming as to how in the year 1994 he sought permission to establish a trust with him as a trustee but the same was turned down. Very surprisingly this file is now missing and in the year 1996 when he sought permission again (which in fact was granted) he did not mention the fact of earlier rejection. All this also shows the malafide intentions of Sh. Navin Chawala.

All these glaring omissions of the past stare at his present today as an Election Commissioner and seriously impinge on his neutrality to act in a free and fair manner. Yet the moot point remains that as per constitutional norms the authority to examine all this is the Chief Election Commissioner alone whose recommendations only is to be considered by the President. Dr. Manmohan Singh or his government has no role in this.

We therefore urge you to direct the Prime Minister to send our complaint dated 16th March immediately to the Chief Election Commissioner as per the constitutional requirement.

With Regards,

Yours Sincerely