Another major appointment, another controversy
Given the uproar in certain sections of the commentariat over former cricketer Chetan Chauhan being made chief of the National Institute of Fashion Technology, it seems like appointments to high-ranking positions in state-run organisations are fast becoming the Modi Government's Achilles heel. It started with television actor Gajendra Chauhan being placed at the helm of affairs at the Film and Television Institute of India; then there was the brouhaha over Y Sudarshan Rao being appointed to the Indian Council for Historical Research; and just when that controversy had settled with Rao's resignation, another one started taking shape with Pahlaj Nihalani, the Modi Government's appointee to the Central Board for Film Certification, stirring the pot.
In fact, it was while Nihalani's latest controversy was at its peak that Chetan Chauhan's appointment was made public, resulting in a furore among the chattering classes. But before delving into the political motivations that almost always underpin such controversies, let us set some basic rules for analysis. In determining whether the appointments were appropriate, the most important question to ask is: Were they in consonance with the rule bookIJ In all cases, the answer is yes. In the case of Chetan Chauhan specifically, the NIFT Act, 2006, expects the chairperson to the statutory body “to be an eminent academic, scientist or technologist or professional”. Chauhan qualifies under the “professional” category.
The next question is: Did the Government pick the right man for the jobIJ There is no right or wrong answer here, as no one candidate can satisfy every person. That said, there is some merit in asking if, for instance, a former cricketer is best placed to run a fashion institute, or if a more renowned film personality could not have been brought in to head FTIIIJ At first glance, the answers seem obvious but dig deeper and the lines begin to blur. For example, FTII has had several illustrious persons from media industry at the helm; yet few have been able to solve its institutional problems, as a result of which the once prestigious institution now struggles to even graduate its students. This is true of the ICHR as well — until the controversy over Rao erupted, the public had almost forgotten that this institute even existed.
That said, it is difficult to completely dismiss all the criticism that the Modi Government has received over this issue, and the likes of Chetan Chauhan, who thinks he is being targeted for his sartorial sense, and Pahlaj Nihalani, who has public described himself as a Modi sycophant, only make it worse. Even if one takes a sympathetic view of the overall situation, given how the left has systematically prevented the conservative ecosystem in this country from growing, as a result of which conservative Governments have to make do with a shallow pool of candidates, it is necessary ask if the BJP has some learning to do when it comes to statecraft.