After the Prime Minister and the Finance Minister came out strongly against the CBI cautioning it against interference in policy matters, it was Centre’s turn on Wednesday to reiterate its opposition to grant ex-officio Secretary status to CBI Director and deny him power to appoint prosecutors.
In an affidavit filed before the Supreme Court, the Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT) put down in writing its objections to the demand by the CBI Director to seek ex-officio secretary post on several counts. It said that the mandate of the Secretary flowed from the Rules framed under the Constitution while this was not true about CBI Director who derived powers out of the DSPE Act, executing Government policy to curb corruption in society. “Granting Director CBI ex-officio powers of the Secretary would run contrary to the above Rules and affect the statutory scheme of governance.”
While the grade and pay of CBI Director is equivalent to Secretary to Government of India, the Centre apprehended giving similar powers would result in unbridled powers being vested in one authority such as specifying which classes of offences to investigate, and conflict of interest may arise over choice of prosecutors.
Further, there would be no checks and balances if CBI Director is allowed to have direct access to Minister. Neither the Secretary (RAW) nor Secretary (Internal Security) could submit files directly to the Minister in-charge.
As for the Railway Board Chairman, with whom the CBI Director drew parallel, the Centre submitted that his post was equivalent to ex-officio Principal Secretary and was responsible to Minister.
On his other demand to appoint Director of Prosecution and law officers, the Centre said that already powers to review and report ACR of DoP and law officers was agreed to be granted, which will suffice autonomy in its functioning. Besides, the CBI Director was provided with financial autonomy equivalent with BSF DG.