Why Modi govt should not have revealed names of black money account holders?

Often politicians glibly say that they cannot comment on an issue  as the matter is sub judice, a convenient alibi for escaping the sustained media and public gaze, little realizing that the doctrine of sub judice has ceased to hold sway in India long ago.

In 1960 India consciously chose to resile from the doctrine that has its origins in countries where jury system of trial is in vogue which India abandoned in that year. Yet, our politicians, many of whom are legal eagles take convenient perch on the non-existent excuse. Be that as it may, the issue is something called respect for the judicial system. If not in deference for sub judice, the government ought to have shown healthy respect for the Apex Court which is now seized of the black money issue.


A special investigation team (SIT) has been constituted by the government at its behest. Against this backdrop, it ought not to have taken upon itself the task of making public the names of illegal account holders in foreign banks. Ram Jethmalani is therefore right in his fulminations against the government on this count even though one may not agree with his and Subramaniam Swamy’s assertion that all the eight hundred names must be revealed in one go. It has not occurred to them that the government seems to have made up its mind to reveal only those names where there is a prima facie evidence of wrongdoing as evident from the calibrated release of just seven names on Monday, reinforcing the view that further names would be revealed carefully in days to come though that might include an element of vendetta.

In normal times, it would have been kosher for the government to do what it thought best but these are not normal times as far as black money is concerned, with the issue having gotten into the hands of the Supreme Court. A parallel can be drawn between the Gujarat riot case for which the Apex court had constituted an SIT. The BJP clung to the SIT report exonerating Modi as manna from the heaven. Indeed it could, but shouldn’t the same logic apply to the present SIT as well? In all probability the government is likely to get a rap on its knuckles for this lese-majesty from the Apex Court itself.

The government has obviously jumped the gun. It should have revealed the names to the SIT which in turn should have gone to the Apex Court asking for further course of action.

The government might wriggle its way out by saying that the matter was independent of the matter before the Supreme Court. But that would be disingenuous. It is true that the government has been working hard with the Swiss government under the Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement(DTAA) but the moment the Supreme Court intervened in the matter, everything relating to black money inextricably got intertwined so that the government could be held in contempt by the Supreme Court for bypassing it. 

Parenthetically, it is wrong for the government to leave the larger issue of black money to be tackled by DTAAS which are essentially meant for ensuring that the same income is not taxed two times over—once in the country of residence and once in the country of its source. To be sure, black money is a subset of the larger endeavor to guard against tax evasion but its generation cannot be prevented by DTAAs alone. The recent resolve of G-20 nations to fight against money laundering and its concomitant black money is praiseworthy.