What personal interest does Madhabi Puri Buch have in not appearing before the parliamentary committee?
#News Bureau, November 1,2024
SEBI chief Madhabi Puri Buch did not appear before the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) on October 24 despite being summoned. This will be remembered as a shameful incident in the parliamentary history of India. This is probably the first time that an official has not appeared on the summons of a parliamentary committee. This should be understood as an insult to the Indian parliamentary system. First of all, it is important to know how important an institution the PAC is for the parliamentary system and accountability.
The history of PAC is linked to 1921 when it was first constituted in India under the Government of India Act-1919. It is one of the 3 financial committees established to ensure the accountability of the government and administration in financial matters. Apart from this, there are two other committees – Estimates Committee (EC) and Public Undertakings Committee. Although PAC is constituted every year under Rule 308 of the Lok Sabha, it actually derives its power from Article 105 and Article 118 of the Constitution.
The importance and utility of this committee for India can be understood from the fact that the Parliamentary Committee which was given the power in the Constitution to investigate the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG), which Dr. Bhim Rao Ambedkar called “the most important office of the Indian Constitution”, which he understood as the “watchdog of public wealth” and established in the Constitution, is named Public Accounts Committee (PAC).
The PAC, whose chairman is made from the opposition, is so that ‘parliamentary control over the government’ can be established, so that parliamentary control can be applied on the arbitrariness of the executive. This also clearly means that any obstruction in the work of this committee should be understood as obstruction of the Parliament of India and interference in its work. The most important thing is that the Indian Constitution has not given the power to obstruct the Parliament to any person or any institution, even if the name of that institution is ‘Supreme Court of India’.
Now the thing was that the chief of the organization that was supposed to investigate Adani, i.e., Madhabi Buch herself had a stake in Adani’s companies. In such a situation, it was not possible for her to conduct an impartial investigation of Adani. To investigate her stake, PAC summoned her to find out what is the relationship between Adani, who is facing several financial allegations, and Madhabi Buch? If there has been financial irregularity, then the misuse of Indian money and institutions can be stopped. But Buch chose not to appear before the committee. Leader of Opposition in Lok Sabha Rahul Gandhi has already made very serious allegations regarding the relationship between Adani and the Prime Minister of India. In such a situation, it was necessary for Madhabi Buch to appear before PAC for the purity of the institutions.
Even if we accept BJP’s argument for a while, the question is what is their problem? And what are they afraid of? Will the whole world fall if the SEBI chief appears before the committee? When elected governments are destabilized through governors, there is no problem, but if a parliamentary committee calls someone to investigate corruption charges, then the BJP objects, is this fair? Almost the same question was raised by the Leader of Opposition in the Lok Sabha, Rahul Gandhi. He said, “Why is Madhavi Buch reluctant to answer questions before the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) of Parliament? … Who is behind the plan to save her from being accountable to the PAC?”
The question here is not about any party. The question is about ensuring transparency and accountability. The current PAC chairman KC Venugopal is not pursuing his personal interest by summoning the SEBI chief, rather he wants to investigate the financial management of the government institution. So that public interest can be ensured.
Ambedkar believed that the PAC not only keeps an account of the actions of the government, but also ensures the proper and efficient use of public funds. Through this, Parliament can keep an eye on the executive, thereby ensuring financial discipline and corruption control. In his view, the PAC is a forum that protects the public interest in government financial matters, and it is an important part of the balance of power in a democracy. This can force the government to be accountable.
