The Hindu Business Line : `200 crorepatis in Maharashtra poll fray'

THE Maharashtra Election Watch (MEW) Committee released a report today at the Press Club presenting a brief background on political candidates from the 288 constituencies going to the polls in the Vidhan Sabha elections on October 13.

The MEW report brings out some startling facts. Two hundred candidates declared themselves as crore-patis (i.e. those with assets in excess of a crore). The assets ranged from Rs 1 crore to Rs 100 crore.

The top three declarations were Mr Chhatrapati Salojirao Rajeshahu of the Congress with over Rs 101 crore in declared assets, Mr Vijay Sawant, also of the Congress, with over Rs 95 crore and the Peasants and Workers Party candidate, Mr Ganesh Patil, with over Rs 90 crore.

There were 100 candidates who declared nil assets and 1,062 did not report a PAN number. Of these, 54 candidates had assets more than Rs 1 crore.

Many candidates owed money to government institutions. In a party-wise breakdown of assets it was found that the Congress led the list with the assets of candidates averaging Rs 288.15 lakh per candidate followed by the Nationalist Congress Party with Rs 167.34 lakh per candidate. The Bharatiya Janata Party at Rs 75.71 lakh per candidate and, lastly, the Shiv Sena at Rs 69.38 lakh per candidate.

Among the candidates, 22.5 per cent had a criminal background with cases numbering from one to 22 pending against them. At 56 per cent the Shiv Sena had the maximum number of candidates with criminal charges framed against them, followed by the BJP (41.4 per cent), the NCP (25 per cent), the Congress (19 per cent) and the Bahujan Samaj Party (15 per cent).

The report notes, "As percentages these were mostly higher than the corresponding data for the April Lok Sabha elections. The report is based on sworn affidavits submitted by the candidates at the time of filing their nominations."

In their affidavits the candidates disclosed their movable and immovable assets, liabilities and details of criminal charges framed against them. The report is a joint effort of MEW, which is the umbrella name under which Action for Good Governance and Networking in India (AGNI) and the Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR) functions.

Time constraints did not permit an exhaustive profile of all candidates and the MEW chose to omit the independent candidates, scrutinising only candidates representing parties. The joint effects of public disclosure and peer disapproval are expected to reduce the frequency of unsuitable candidates contesting the polls.

"It's about disclosures not disqualifications," said Dr Ajit Ranade, founder member of the ADR, when questioned about the obvious unsuitability of some candidates. The first such report was brought out prior to the Lok Sabha elections.

Mr Gerson DaCunha, convenor and trustee of the NGO, AGNI, described it as "finger pointing at political parties which is meant to provoke voters into asking why these people were nominated by their parties in the first place." He described the process and the culmination of the report as a "milestone event" that was initiated in December 1999 when the ADR petitioned the Supreme Court asking for disclosure of candidates' backgrounds at the time of filing their nomination papers.

After hearing the petition in 2000 the Supreme Court upheld the petition.

"Unbelievably the government appealed against this but after four and a half years of back and forth, citizens finally have an instrument in their hands that gives them the right to informed choice," said Mr DaCunha.

Though the report will help voters make an informed choice it has some drawbacks. One, it relies entirely on candidates honesty for making the disclosures.

Two, if the disclosures are incorrect then the MEW has no authority to pull up the candidate.

And three, the MEW depends completely on voter involvement for affidavit verification.

In fact MEW is hoping to provoke voters into taking more of an interest in their candidates.

"We depend on local people who know their candidate to challenge affidavits," said Mr B.G. Deshmukh, Chairman of AGNI and former Cabinet Secretary, when the first report was released.

However, the onus of truth need not necessarily be on the voter.

The Income-Tax department or the Election Commission can take up a suo moto case since there are candidates who have declared substantial assets but say they have no PAN number.

What the organisations under MEW lack in teeth as non-statutory bodies they make up in terms of credibility with voters who known them as prominent, concerned citizens capable of articulating the concerns of the common man.

More Stories on : Politics | Maharashtra

Article E-Mail :: Comment :: Syndication :: Printer Friendly Page

Stories in this Section
Jaipal Reddy defends autonomy for Prasar Bharati

`200 crorepatis in Maharashtra poll fray'

AP Naxalites propose agenda for talks

AP: `Red carpet' for Naxal leaders

UK firm unveils anti-terror tool; ties up with Cygnus

IT has vital impact on military operations, says DRDO official