EDITORIAL : THE HINDU, INDIA

Small but significant step

The supplementary charge sheet in the 2G spectrum allocation case is a small but significant step for the Central Bureau of Investigation in what is clearly a difficult journey in pursuit of truth and justice. The first charge sheet kept out some sensitive names for reasons of political expediency. The second deals mostly with one money trail, involving about Rs.200 crore, from Swan Telecom to Kalaignar TV, which is but a small part of the Rs.22,000 crore that the CBI estimates to be the loss to the government in the spectrum scam. However, in the context of the criminal investigation of the case, this money trail plays a crucial role by laying bare an intricate web of financial transactions which, decoded, could establish a quid pro quo between politicians in power and businessmen who benefited from the manipulation of the ‘first-come, first-served' policy in spectrum allocation. True, Kalaignar TV paid back the amount with interest, but this was only between December 2010 and February 2011 after the CBI registered the case, which seemed more like a cover-up attempt. Moreover, during the period of the transaction between December 2008 and August 2009, the paid-up equity of Kalaignar TV was merely Rs.10.01 crore, and its entire income for the year ending March 31, 2009 Rs.47.54 crore. Not surprisingly, the judge of the Special Court, taking cognisance of the charge sheet, said he was satisfied that there was “enough incriminating material on record to proceed against the accused persons.”

While questions have been raised about the non-inclusion of Dayalu Ammal, wife of Tamil Nadu Chief Minister M. Karunanidhi, who owns 60 per cent of the shares in Kalaignar TV, the CBI's reasoning is that the octogenarian had informed the board of directors as far back as July 27, 2007 of her inability to “give any attention to the company's affairs.” Because of her “age and non-understanding of any language other than Tamil,” she had told the board of directors, she would attend its meetings “only to suffice the legal requirement to have quorum.” In the case of Ms Kanimozhi, although she was not a director, the charge sheet names her as a co-conspirator alleging a strong association with A. Raja in “official/political matters.” It was important for the CBI to demonstrate to the Supreme Court of India, which is monitoring this investigation, and the public that there would be no let-up in the investigation under political pressure. But given the nature and size of the scam and the time lost, the agency will need to discover and pursue other money trails to carry the investigation through to its logical end. The question on everyone's lips, ‘where did the rest of the money go?', needs some quick and decisive answers.

Don't doom these temples, please

The border row between Thailand and Cambodia troublingly shows no sign of ending. The two countries have once again traded gunfire, this time near two 12th century temples in an area that is claimed by both sides. It is unclear who fired the first shot, but in three days of fighting 11 soldiers — five on the Thai side, and six on the Cambodian — were killed, and more than 40 wounded. Thousands of civilians have been displaced. This is the second flare-up on the border this year. In February, there was fighting near Preah Vihear, another temple 200 km from the site of the latest confrontation. ASEAN managed to douse the tension the last time, with Indonesia, currently in the chair, playing the mediator. An informal ceasefire came into place, but a peace agreement to post unarmed Indonesian military observers along the border remained on paper because of Thailand's resistance to outside intervention in what it considers a bilateral matter. On the other hand, Cambodia clearly wants to internationalise the issue beyond ASEAN: during the February clashes, Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Sen complained to the United Nations Security Council that Thai forces had invaded his country. In the circumstances, the door appears closed to ASEAN's mediatory initiatives. The cancellation of the Indonesian Foreign Minister's April 25 visit to Bangkok as well as Phnom Penh was the clearest indication of this.

While sizable portions of the Thai-Cambodian border are undemarcated, the main dispute is centred on their rival claims to the Preah Vihear temple. A 1962 International Court of Justice ruling that the 900-year-old Siva temple belonged to Cambodia failed to resolve the problem as it did not address the rival claims to the territory around the temple. In 2008, the temple's listing as a UNESCO World Heritage site further angered Thais, and led to the first military face-off on this issue. In both countries, the issue is handy for politicians to whip up nationalist sentiments and make allegations that sovereignty has been ceded to the other side. While rhetoric is one thing, a military confrontation can hardly provide a solution. The two countries must also keep in mind the risks to the temples. Preah Vihear is held to be one of the finest examples of Khmer architecture outside Angkor; any damage to it would be tragic and self-defeating. As responsible members of the international community, Thailand and Cambodia must both muster the political will to resolve this long-standing row peacefully, soon.