The Central Bureau of Investigations (CBI) has removed one of its public prosecutors on the 2G spectrum scam case, after taped phone conversations allegedly showed him giving advice to one of the accused in the matter.
According to the Times of India, senior public prosecutor AK Singh said to the managing director of Unitech, who is one of the main targets of the case, “I have been muddling up the matters only for you” while coaching him on his defence:
In a revealing bit, Singh asks the person purported to be Chandra what would be the value of a lawyer like him in the corporate sector. Chandra replies by mentioning a monthly salary of Rs 3 -4 lakh a month , excluding the daily appearance fee which according to him doubled in the wake of 2G scam.
Advocate Chitranshul wrote on his blog today that news of a public prosecutor (PP) colluding with accused would not be surprising to most lawyers:
Every trial lawyer has a story where a PP was mixed up with the accused and botched up the prosecution to help get an acquittal. However, the root of the problem lies in low fees paid by the State to PPs. They are burdened with a heavy workload for meagre fees and face constant pressure to force a conviction. A consequence of such duties is that they cannot take up cases independently and thus their livelihood depends on such trials…
Under such circumstances, it may be said that PPs may be easily influenced by the accused by enticing them with riches. Where a PP sees defense lawyers being paid small fortunes to defend the accused, duty to put forward a strong case for prosecution would be rarely backed by motivation. It reduces to be a duty and becomes a burden.
threads most popular
thread most upvoted
comment newest
first oldest
first
The problem in the first place lies in the manner of appointment. Appointments are generally based on recommendation made by a political executive or a legislator, which includes MPs and MLAs. More often then not, advocates with very little independent work vie for such positions. Given the fact that advocates with very little work are appointed as Government lawyer effects the quality of Government defence. Secondly, the remuneration payable to the Government/Government panel lawyers is antiquated. Lot many governments/authorities/corporations continue with a fees structure that was approved 10 to 20 years ago. Moreover, there the assignment of briefs does not follow any scientific pattern. Some of them are overloaded with due reward. This results in making such advocates work mechanically and also vulnerable to offers made from private litigant.
A systematic, transparent and merit based approach to selection of Government lawyers will help the justice administration system in multiple ways given the fact that the Govt. is the leading litigant in this country. This will ensure proper defence of Government cases, wherein sometimes high stakes or an important policy matter is involved. Secondly, it will also help reduce the pendency in different courts and make the judicial system much more reliable in view of the fact that very often the Government lawyer is not prepared for a matter on the board resulting in adjournment and clogging of dockets.
To start with, only junior members of the Bar may be appointed on a nomination basis while the PPs, GAs, AGAs should be selected based upon their past performance and experience. A panel comprising the law secretary of the State, the Advocate General and a Retired Judge may be formed to advice the Government on such selections, which could be based on a review of CV followed by an interview. The antecedents of the potential appointees may also be verified to ensure that lawyers with doubtful integrity do not enter the system. Lastly, remuneration payable to the Government lawyers must be increased from time to time basing upon practical considerations.
I believe this will not only help cleanse the system but also ensure speedy and effective justice delivery.
ibnlive.in.com/news/agustawestland-chopper-deal-how-the-exiaf-chiefs-cousins-were-bribed/372880-3.html
I make no comment on the guilt or innocence of the lawyer, but there needs to be an inquiry into the role played by some top law firms in certain big deals.
www.dnaindia.com/india/report_italian-chopper-deal-former-aeromatrix-director-gautam-khaitan-denies-any-involvement_1800071
threads most popular
thread most upvoted
comment newest
first oldest
first