New Delhi: In a severe indictment, Delhi Lokayukta on Wednesday held Chief Minister Sheila Dikshit guilty of allegedly misusing public funds on an advertisement campaign to get political mileage ahead of last assembly polls and recommended recovery of Rs 11 crore either from her or the Congress.
Lokayukta Justice Manmohan Sarin recommended President Pranab Mukherjee to administer "caution" to Dikshit for the alleged misuse of public funds for a series of advertisements carried out in print and outdoor media in 2007-08 with punchline "Delhi is changing". He recommended to the President to "advise" Dikshit to reimburse either herself or through her party a sum of Rs 11 crore as half the cost of the advertisements in 2008 or any amount the President finds adequate.
When her reaction was sought, Dikshit said that "I have not read the (Lokayukta) order. I do not know about the charges. Let the order come to me. But I want to say that I have no guilt complex". The Chief Minister was holding charge of the Department of Information and Publicity when the advertisement campaign was carried out.
The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) was quick to demand resignation of Dikshit and accused her of "destroying the sanctity" of the Chief Minister's office. "Dikshit has betrayed Delhi residents by using hard earned tax payers' money to serve personal interest. She must step down immediately. If she does not step down, then she should be sacked immediately. Also a case of misusing public money should be immediately lodged against her," Delhi BJP chief Vijay Goel said. He indicated that BJP will use the Lokayukta order to corner Dikshit in the run up to the assembly polls slated in November.
The Lokayukta had initiated the inquiry into the matter following a complaint filed in 2009 by Vijender Gupta, former Delhi BJP president. In his complaint, Gupta had charged Dikshit with abusing her position as Chief Minister by carrying out an advertisement campaign with a view to gain political mileage in the assembly election in 2008. Gupta had alleged the government machinery, particularly the Department of Information and Publicity, was instructed to make an elaborate plan to project the Chief Minister in a positive light to gain advantage during election and overcome the anti-incumbency factor.
"The pattern of advertisements published by the government of Delhi and the Congress Party clearly establishes a proximate and inextricable nexus between the two," said the Lokayukta while referring to advertisements carried out by Congress party as well. "The advertisements issued by the Delhi government on a particular subject, over a period of time in the election year culminated in Congress Party advertisements on the same subject. Both were published in the election year....there is a clear synergy and synchronisation between the advertisements issued by the Government and those by the Congress Party," the order said.
The Lokayukta also recommended to the President to direct the government to frame guidelines for publication of government advertisements to prevent misuse of public funds in future. In the order, the Lokayukta favoured specific norms for publication of photographs of national leaders of political parties in government advertisements to discourage developing a "personality cult" or "advancing political interests". The Lokayukta said Dikshit kept a strict control over all the advertisements issued by various departments of Delhi government and "was thus directly responsible therefor".
"A Delhi government circular mandated approval of all advertisements by the Chief Minister and disciplinary action for violation thereof," the order said. An article titled "Sheila Ki Campaign Ranniti" authored by Uday Sahay, the then Director of Information and Publicity Department, had disclosed the strategy devised by Chief Minister and her department to make an elaborate campaign to overcome the anti-incumbency factor for her and to project the Chief Minister and help her win the election in 2008, the Lokayukta said. Justice Sarin said the article was published in a newpaper on June 29, 2009.
In his order, the Lokayukta overruled Dikshit's objections that the matter cannot be taken up by the anti-graft body as it was an election matter which falls under provisions of the Representation of Peoples Act, 1951. "There is no challenge to the election. Hence, the submission that remedy under any other statute except the Representation of People's Act, 1951 was barred is wholly misconceived. It is held that the complaint is not in the nature of election petition," Lokayukta said.
Rejecting various other objections of Dikshit's lawyer, the Lokayukta said only objective of the anti-graft body was to usher in probity and good governance and ensure adherence to norms of integrity and conduct amongst high 'public functionaries'.
Comments
0 comment