NEW DELHI: Former Congress leader and independent Rajya Sabha MP Kapil Sibal on Saturday questioned the timing of Enforcement Directorate (ED) actions against opposition leaders, alleging that the central agency acts selectively, particularly when elections are due in a state.
Addressing a press conference hosted by him, Sibal also urged the Supreme Court to hear the review petitions pending before it on the jurisdiction of central agencies probing cases under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA).
Sibal alleged that the sole motive behind the ED’s action in West Bengal appeared to be harassment of opposition leaders. He cited instances of alleged probe agency action against Hemant Soren in Jharkhand and against Lalu Prasad and Tejashwi Yadav in Bihar during Assembly elections.
Noting that ED officials cannot take away all documents, the Rajya Sabha member asked what exactly the agency was investigating following the raids on I-PAC in West Bengal.
On Thursday, the ED conducted raids at the office of political consultancy firm I-PAC and at the residence of its chief, Prateek Jain, in Kolkata in connection with an alleged coal smuggling case.
However, the agency officials reportedly faced obstruction during the raid, with the ED alleging that West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee entered the premises and took away “key” evidence related to the probe.
Sibal, a former Union Minister in the government led by then Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, said that during the UPA regime, no political party or leader was harassed on the basis of false information. Between 2004 and 2014, when the UPA was in power, the ED was never given such a free hand, he added.
“When the ED was constituted, we did not know that it was an omnipresent prosecuting agency which could go anywhere, anytime in the country. It can also attack the federal structure, like troubling opposition leaders and making their governments fall, justified or not,” Sibal said.
Saying he was pained by the developments in West Bengal, the MP added, “I do not want the unity and integrity of our country to be disturbed.”
Asked whether the Centre could impose President’s Rule in the state in view of the developments, Sibal said, “If someone takes an arbitrary decision without any basis, then that would have consequences too. If they are winning by a two-thirds majority, then there will be a victory by three-fourths.”
Sibal, who is also a senior advocate, sought to blame the Supreme Court for not hearing the review petitions pending before it on the jurisdiction of probe agencies.
“The time has come for all issues to be looked into by the Supreme Court. Otherwise, the federal structure would break down, and this would not go down well with people.”
He said what is happening is that wherever an FIR is registered, the ED reaches there, as it feels it has the right to investigate everywhere.
“It is also interesting that the ED acts only where elections are held. One would recall Jharkhand, when the ED reached there during the elections. The same was done in Bihar, when the ED reached there during elections and the court started the process so that Lalu Prasad and Tejashwi Yadav had to come to Delhi and their election schedule was disturbed,” Sibal said, adding, “Now the ED has reached West Bengal as the elections are to be held there.”
Asked about the ED’s allegation that the West Bengal Chief Minister caused hindrance during the raids on I-PAC, Sibal said, “The ED should first tell what they were investigating. If they wanted documents related to the coal scam, at least that is what newspapers report, they should have asked for access to computers... We will not take anything and ask for information relating to the coal scam.”