<p>The Supreme Court’s admonition of the Enforcement Directorate (ED) and its advice to it not to create an atmosphere of fear should be considered as necessary and well-meaning counsel to the agency which is “running amok” in the country.</p>.<p>The allegation that it is targeting political opponents and critics of the government at the Centre is not new and has gained currency and credibility in the recent past, especially during the second tenure of the Narendra Modi government.</p>.<p><strong>Read | <a href="https://www.deccanherald.com/national/don-t-create-an-atmosphere-of-fear-sc-to-ed-in-chhattisgarh-liquor-scam-1219230.html" target="_blank">‘Don’t create an atmosphere of fear’, SC to ED in Chhattisgarh liquor scam</a></strong></p>.<p>The Supreme Court made its comments when it was dealing with a petition of the Chhattisgarh government which said that the agency was trying to implicate Chief Minister Bhupesh Baghel in a money laundering case linked to an alleged Rs 2,000-crore liquor scam in the state. The Congress government has said that the ED was acting at the behest of its political masters and conducting a ‘completely biased’ investigation, designed to create instability in the state.</p>.<p>The state government invoked Article 131 of the Constitution which empowers a state to move the court directly in matters of dispute with the Union or a state government and challenge the validity of some provisions of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA). This law is now being weaponised by the ED. The Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) in Delhi and Punjab, the Trinamool Congress in West Bengal, and the Left Front in Kerala have also accused the Centre of misusing the ED for political gains. The use of the particularly stringent provisions of the PMLA, which makes it almost impossible to get bail, strengthens the argument that the law and the ED actions are intended for harassment. Earlier this month, the court had taken the Centre to task for granting a third extension to ED chief Sanjay Kumar Mishra, and asked the government what made him “so indispensable”. The government told the court that Mishra would not continue in office beyond November. The ED’s powers under the PMLA have also been challenged in the court.</p>.<p>The court made an important observation that even a legitimate investigation made by the agency would look suspect if the impression gains ground that its cases are mostly politically motivated. Corrupt people and those who have actually committed illegalities would be able to play victim and claim that they are being harassed. Investigating agencies, like national institutions, should serve national causes and should not be used for the partisan and political ends of the government in power and the ruling party. It will be difficult to regain the operational culture and credibility of these agencies if they are lost. Already they have lost much of the people’s faith in them. The court’s counsel is relevant in this context.</p>
<p>The Supreme Court’s admonition of the Enforcement Directorate (ED) and its advice to it not to create an atmosphere of fear should be considered as necessary and well-meaning counsel to the agency which is “running amok” in the country.</p>.<p>The allegation that it is targeting political opponents and critics of the government at the Centre is not new and has gained currency and credibility in the recent past, especially during the second tenure of the Narendra Modi government.</p>.<p><strong>Read | <a href="https://www.deccanherald.com/national/don-t-create-an-atmosphere-of-fear-sc-to-ed-in-chhattisgarh-liquor-scam-1219230.html" target="_blank">‘Don’t create an atmosphere of fear’, SC to ED in Chhattisgarh liquor scam</a></strong></p>.<p>The Supreme Court made its comments when it was dealing with a petition of the Chhattisgarh government which said that the agency was trying to implicate Chief Minister Bhupesh Baghel in a money laundering case linked to an alleged Rs 2,000-crore liquor scam in the state. The Congress government has said that the ED was acting at the behest of its political masters and conducting a ‘completely biased’ investigation, designed to create instability in the state.</p>.<p>The state government invoked Article 131 of the Constitution which empowers a state to move the court directly in matters of dispute with the Union or a state government and challenge the validity of some provisions of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA). This law is now being weaponised by the ED. The Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) in Delhi and Punjab, the Trinamool Congress in West Bengal, and the Left Front in Kerala have also accused the Centre of misusing the ED for political gains. The use of the particularly stringent provisions of the PMLA, which makes it almost impossible to get bail, strengthens the argument that the law and the ED actions are intended for harassment. Earlier this month, the court had taken the Centre to task for granting a third extension to ED chief Sanjay Kumar Mishra, and asked the government what made him “so indispensable”. The government told the court that Mishra would not continue in office beyond November. The ED’s powers under the PMLA have also been challenged in the court.</p>.<p>The court made an important observation that even a legitimate investigation made by the agency would look suspect if the impression gains ground that its cases are mostly politically motivated. Corrupt people and those who have actually committed illegalities would be able to play victim and claim that they are being harassed. Investigating agencies, like national institutions, should serve national causes and should not be used for the partisan and political ends of the government in power and the ruling party. It will be difficult to regain the operational culture and credibility of these agencies if they are lost. Already they have lost much of the people’s faith in them. The court’s counsel is relevant in this context.</p>
