The Supreme Court will not reconsider its judgment on the Prevention of Money Laundering Act

The Supreme Court has rightly decided to reconsider its verdict on the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), 2002. Reconsideration is over two issues: reversal of the presumption of innocence and sharing the Enforcement Case Information Report (ECIR). On July 27 this year, the three-judge Bench of the apex court, headed by Justice Khanwilkar, had upheld the PMLA. This meant a leg up for the Enforcement Directorate (ED) for its powers to arrest, search, etc., in money laundering offences were validated. While maintaining “the principle of innocence of the accused/offender is regarded as a human right,” the Bench said “that presumption can be interdicted by a law” made by Parliament. It also said since an ECIR cannot be equated with a first information report or FIR, it was not mandatory to provide the ECIR in every case to the person accused. The court said that “it is enough if ED, at the time of arrest, discloses the grounds of such arrest.” This decision was widely criticised by the Opposition parties and jurists. Opposition leaders have long been complaining about the wide powers enjoyed by the ED; they have also been accusing the Narendra Modi Government of using the ED for political purposes—a charge that the Government and the Bharatiya Janata Party leaders have been denying vociferously.

While politicians will continue to hurl allegations at each other, a couple of facts need to be underlined. First, if the PMLA has become toxic and the ED unrestrained, it is not the doing of this regime alone. As the SC Bench said in its July 26 judgment, former finance minister Yashwant Sinha in his December 1999 speech “set the tone for the years to come in the fight against money laundering.” It also mentioned another former finance minister, P Chidambaram, whose speech in the Rajya Sabha in December 2012 explained the need for amendment(s) to the PMLA. But now the boot is on the other foot. Chidambaram himself is being investigated by the ED and the Central Bureau of Investigation. His son Karti Chidambaram, who is also being probed by the two agencies, wants the SC verdict to be reconsidered. Second, Opposition leaders just keep lamenting all the time about the abuse of Central investigation agencies; they never come out with something concrete. Nobody in the right frame of mind would say that these agencies should be misused, so their lamentations are of no utility; they must inform the people how they intend to make the functioning of these agencies efficient and impartial. Money laundering is a big problem, so also are corruption, terror, etc.; therefore, fight against such evils has to continue, but it should be in such a manner that there is no collateral damage in terms of political targeting. Just making bombastic statements and tweeting catchy one-liners will help neither politicians nor serve the cause of justice. Substantive action is needed.