Let The Investigation Run, Mr CM

As a citizen who follows Karnataka’s politics closely, I’ve always believed that our leaders should be accountable, transparent, and, above all, willing to face the truth—no matter how uncomfortable it may be. So, when Siddaramaiah, a leader I once admired for his strong stance on social justice, made his statements about the MUDA case, I couldn’t help but feel disappointed. His response doesn’t just raise legal questions, but deeper concerns about how our political leaders view responsibility.

Siddaramaiah’s assertion that the High Court’s decision to initiate an inquiry under Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act does not imply wrongdoing may be legally accurate, but as a citizen, I cannot help but question why he is not fully embracing the investigation. If Siddaramaiah is confident that he has done no wrong, why is he so eager to move the Supreme Court in an effort to challenge the inquiry?

For me, this creates the perception that there might be something to hide. As someone who believes that leaders should be open to scrutiny, I think Siddaramaiah would serve the public better by welcoming the investigation rather than attempting to block it. The public deserves transparency, and resisting an inquiry only raises more questions.

Siddaramaiah’s repeated accusations that this inquiry is part of “vendetta politics” orchestrated by the BJP-led central government are troubling to me. Yes, political rivalries are a reality in India, but labeling every corruption inquiry as politically motivated feels like an attempt to dodge responsibility. Are we to believe that opposition parties should remain silent about corruption for fear of being accused of playing politics?

To me, the role of the opposition is crucial in any democracy. They are tasked with holding the government accountable, especially when there are allegations of misconduct. Dismissing opposition efforts as mere political games undermines the very fabric of our democratic checks and balances. It’s not about vendetta politics; it’s about ensuring that those in power are held accountable.

While Siddaramaiah points out that the governor previously refused to sanction prosecution and that the High Court rejected charges under Section 218 of the BNSS, I feel this is missing the point. Legal technicalities may protect him from prosecution for now, but what about the moral responsibility that comes with holding public office?

As a leader, Siddaramaiah has an obligation not just to follow the letter of the law but also to uphold its spirit. Even if the legal system temporarily halts prosecution, it does not mean the allegations of corruption should be brushed aside. A true leader would seek to clear their name through full cooperation with the inquiry, not by hiding behind legal defenses.

Siddaramaiah’s remarks that the BJP and JD(S) lost the 2023 Assembly elections and are now trying to destabilise his government ring hollow to me. Just because a party loses an election doesn’t mean they should give up their role as the opposition. The opposition’s job is to challenge the government, especially when it comes to issues of corruption and governance. Suggesting that their actions are simply born out of sour grapes is unfair and diminishes the importance of political opposition in a democracy.

As a citizen, I expect the opposition to do its job and bring corruption allegations to light. Whether or not they lost the election is irrelevant. Accountability doesn’t stop at the ballot box—it’s an ongoing process that all political parties must engage in, whether they are in power or not.

Siddaramaiah’s confidence that “the people of Karnataka are behind him” in this political struggle feels like a misinterpretation of what leadership is about. Yes, he may have won electoral support, but public trust goes beyond winning an election. It is earned and maintained through transparency and integrity. The support of voters does not grant immunity from investigation. In fact, I believe that public figures should be more willing to face scrutiny, precisely because they hold the public’s trust.

For me, the question isn’t whether Siddaramaiah won an election—it’s whether he’s willing to be accountable to the people who put him in office. The fact that he seems more concerned with blocking the inquiry rather than cooperating with it makes me doubt his commitment to the principles of transparency and good governance.

Siddaramaiah’s accusation that the BJP is using the governor’s office to destabilise his government feels like a diversion from the real issue - the allegations of corruption. While I am aware that the misuse of governors’ offices has been a recurring problem in Indian politics, that doesn’t change the fact that there are serious concerns that need to be addressed. By shifting the focus to the governor, Siddaramaiah risks distracting from the core question: Did any corruption take place?

As a citizen, I want to see Siddaramaiah focus on disproving the allegations through evidence, not by deflecting the blame onto the governor or the opposition. If the inquiry is truly politically motivated, let that truth come out through a transparent investigation, not through attempts to block it.

I believe that Siddaramaiah’s statements reflect a troubling attempt to evade accountability rather than embrace it. While he may have legal grounds to challenge certain aspects of the inquiry, what matters most to me as a citizen is transparency and openness. Blocking investigations, accusing the opposition of vendetta politics, and hiding behind legal defenses only serve to erode public trust in our leaders.

Instead of viewing this as a political struggle, Siddaramaiah should view it as an opportunity to clear his name and reinforce his leadership by welcoming the inquiry and cooperating fully. Only then can he truly claim to uphold the values of democracy, law, and accountability that he so frequently cites.