Search the Internet           Tips

Villain or Visionary?

I am flummoxed by the court verdict against former prime minister P V Narasimha Rao.

On one hand, I am delighted that our legal system has once again proved that it is fiercely independent and cannot be compromised. If a prime minister is caught taking or paying a bribe, the courts are ready to mete out to him exactly the same treatment as they would have meted out to a corrupt beat constable. No more, no less.

On the other hand, I suspect that there is something missing in a judgment that allows the actual bribe givers, Satish Sharma and Bhajan Lal and the two Bangalore-based liquor barons D K Adidesavulu and M Thime Gowda and those who got the money, Sibu Soren, Suraj Mandal, Simon Marandi and Shailendra Mahato to go scot free while it punishes only the strategists.

Rao and Buta Singh, if the prosecution is to be believed, only plotted and planned while the others handled the cash. For the courts to punish them with three years rigorous imprisonment while acquitting those who did the deed appears somewhat unfair. But to Judge Ajit Bharihoke's credit, he has also directed the CBI to confiscate the bribe money and register a fresh case against the JMM leaders who have confessed to taking it.

I also think that the media has been less than fair to Rao. For all his faults and failures, from St Kitts to the Great Securities Scam to Pickle King Phatak's cheating charges to the Sugar Scam to the Karsan Urea case, he was also (let us not forget it) single-handedly responsible for initiating the liberalisation process which is at the heart of making modern India as we know it today.

The fact that foreign investments have come, our balance of payments position has improved remarkably and India is no more teetering on the edge of bankruptcy owes, in no small measure, to the steps initiated by Rao. In that sense, he is the one prime minister who has changed India more fundamentally than anyone before or after him. He may have been far less glamorous than the Nehrus and Gandhis but he was, in a sense, far more impactual in real terms. He brought about serious, far reaching change without resorting to fancy ideological footwork.

At the same time, he surrounded himself with scum. Whether it was the revolting Rasputin of his court, Chandra Swami or his choice of a Cabinet that, barring Manmohan Singh, was distinctively brain-dead, Rao could not tolerate the idea of having clever, honest, decent people around him. So he surrounded himself with the Satish Sharmas and Buta Singhs of the world.

It was typical of him. He not only suffered fools, he actually navigated his ship of fools with such expertise that Hieronymus Bosch would have been proud. Apart from Rajiv I have never known a prime minister so steeped in garbage. The dirty, rotten scoundrels who surrounded him all the time succeeded in making his tenure the most scandalous in recent history. Which is possibly one reason why no one is ready to shed a tear for a man who was once prime minister of India and now, in his ailing eighties, is readying to go to Tihar. Like any other petty criminal.

His sleazy autobiographical novels nor all his cunning intellectual pretensions can detract from the simple, hardcore fact that here was a man who had the opportunity to leave an enduring impression on India and but chose, in his greed, to be remembered only as a venal imposter. He may remain in the history books but for all the wrong reasons.

For befriending the monstrous Chandra Swami.

For sitting back and allowing the Babri Masjid to be demolished.

For accepting a crore from Harshad Mehta in a suitcase.

For presiding over the biggest stock market scam of all time and then trying to wash his hands off.

For being charged with scam after scam.

The sugar scam that felled Kalpnath Rai.

The Karsan urea scam involving his nephew Rajeshwar Rao.

The Goldstar scam involving his son Prabhakar Rao.

For taking bribes from NRIs like Lakkubhai Phatak.

For forging the St Kitts documents and trying to falsely implicate V P Singh and his son Ajeya in a FERA case that he knew was entirely faked.

In that sense, Rao was, without doubt, the single most amoral prime minister India has ever had. He had no shame, no discretion, no izzat. He was driven only by ambition, greed and a solipsistic, self indulgent, venal worldview.

Yet it is true that no one changed India more than him. All the credit that goes to Manmohan Singh for reviving and revitalising our economy through structural reforms must be shared with Rao for he chose Singh as his finance minister against all advice. There were many in the Congress dying for that job but he chose to stay with Singh and supported him all through.

He fought back the status quoists in his party and opened up the economy, bringing about changes that no one ever thought could have been possible in a country so deeply mortgaged to socialist rhetoric. And even if he does go to Tihar to spend the last years of his life in rigorous imprisonment, we owe him that recognition.

Does that make him a villain or a visionary? I have no idea. In politics, the dividing line between the two is too thin. I am sure his admirers and his enemies are as confused because it is not easy to figure out whether we are punishing a great visionary for a minor indiscretion or not letting a crook go simply because he once held the highest office in the land.

READ The complete coverage of the JMM bribery case

Pritish Nandy

Tell us what you think of this column