Distilled question

There’s always a queasy feeling when confronted with details of frenetic rule-bending by those in power or by those in proximity to those in power — we are reminded how hollow the big apparatus of the state can be. So knowing how easily basic environmental rules were ignored while clearing a distillery that has the honour of having among its directors, Shailesh Patil, son of Shivraj Patil, produces that queasiness. Patil Junior’s entrepreneurial zest and the irregularities engendered by it are being investigated in detail by this newspaper. And it is clear that Patil Junior’s business experience should be added to that long and inglorious list of case studies in which indulgent parent-politicians proudly watch their children being rewarded by an easily manipulable nanny-state. But the Patils’ case has a special meaning given the current political context.

Patil Senior has been a remarkably uninspiring home minister in a cabinet fairly full of less-than-inspirational ministers. Patil has stood out because not only has there been a singular lack of progress under his watch in any of the pressing internal security problems but there has also been a general decay in morale among the security brass, a problem that can be traced to the political spin that has been put on certain aspects of guarding internal security. Now, of course, Patil Junior’s entrepreneurial ambitions could have flourished under a rule-bending state even if Patil Senior had been a home minister the mere mention of whose name produced a frisson of terror among terrorists. Brilliant administrators are not necessarily morally vigilant ones. But it is the rule of politics and indeed of any serious pursuit that while being good at your job is no excuse for unbecoming conduct, being not-so-good at your job adds to the burden when under scrutiny.

So how will the Congress react? Patil Senior can take recourse to a list of responses used by many in similar situations in case he’s asked to explain his son’s activities. But will his party ask him? It is true that fathers can’t be automatically asked to repent for their son’s actions, but it is equally true that senior ministers can’t say government rule-bending to suit their children’s ambitions is a matter of legitimate indifference to them.