The constantly expanding contours of the 'Great 2G Spectrum Robbery' make it what it truly is: A stunningly shameful and shocking scandal. Worse, the scandal now threatens to scorch, if not taint, an accidental politician-turned-Prime Minister whose sole asset till now has been his unimpeachable integrity. Nobody is suggesting, nor should anybody even think of it, that Mr Manmohan Singh was in any manner involved with l'affaire Raja which, according to the Comptroller and Auditor-General, has cost the public exchequer a mind-boggling `1.76 lakh crore. But it is increasingly becoming obvious, through assertions made under oath in the Supreme Court and the publication of official letters, including in this newspaper, that Mr Singh failed to take a stand when he should have — both as primus inter pares, the man who heads the Union Cabinet, and the custodian of the values on which our Republic is founded, namely, the Government shall be constantly mindful of the interests of the people it governs. When Mr Dayanidhi Maran, as Telecom Minister, sought to keep the auctioning of 2G Spectrum out of the purview of the Empowered Group of Ministers, a mechanism that was devised to ensure transparency and prevent bending of rules, Mr Singh should have bluntly rejected the demand of the Congress's ally in Government. Integrity and probity cannot be — indeed, must not allowed to be — held hostage to the so-called compulsions of coalition politics. That would trivialise governance itself and make a mockery of the basic principles according to which the Cabinet as a collective entity and Ministers as individuals are supposed to function. It was not for Mr Maran to decide what he should or should not be allowed to do, but for the Cabinet to take a collective view. Sadly, that was not done, nor did the Prime Minister exercise his executive authority.
Similarly, Mr Singh failed to respond adequately to the shenanigans of Mr A Raja after he took over as Telecom Minister from Mr Maran. The disgraced Telecom Minister's rant in self-defence need not be taken seriously, but he is not being entirely untruthful when he says that the Prime Minister was aware of the entire affair at every stage. There is documentary evidence to prove this point, as also to demonstrate that despite such knowledge Mr Singh did not even wag his finger in admonition. Instead, he stood aside, as if by distancing himself from the scam as it unfolded would give him immunity from being held accountable. Mr Singh was morally obliged to stand between his Telecom Minister and fly-by-night operators and do the right thing by scuttling the conspiracy to defraud the nation. He failed to do so — some would even say that he chose not to do so. More importantly, as Prime Minister he should have been more receptive to information that was forwarded to him from time to time, alerting him about the mischief afoot in Sanchar Bhavan. Once again, he did not bother to take note of the information — or, as others would say, he chose to ignore it. It would be facetious to suggest that on both counts he was found wanting because of the 'compulsions' of coalition politics. It would be equally facetious to suggest that he has redeemed himself by getting rid of Mr Raja: That happened because there was no other option left.
