Mohan Subramaniam, Solicitor General (SG) of India, was being interviewed over the television about the Supreme Court earlier today directing the prime minister's office to file an affidavit with it by the next Saturday detailing the correspondence it exchanged with Subramaniam Swamy who, in November 2008, had sought the prime minister's permission to prosecute A. Raja for gross irregularities in allotting 2G spectrum. To the interviewer's observation that this was the first time that the p.m.'s word conveyed through one of the government's senior most law officers was not considered good enough by the court the SG said it was not unusual, after all it was just a part of the adjudicatory process. He also tried to differentiate between the p.m. and the p.m.o. by saying that it would be one of the p.m.o. officials who would be signing the affidavit, not the p.m. himself. As if he meant to say that even if an affront was there it was to the p.m.o. and not to the p.m. Not very convincing!
The SG also said that in the p.m.o.'s communications the situation was explained to Swamy in some detail and that all relative files would be produced in the court to substantiate it. The p.m.o. had nothing to hide. Then he said that he as a lawyer he would like to assure the nation that the p.m.o. had acted in this case according to the law. I could not take it anymore and changed the channel. When his principal, the prime minister, through his conduct in the entire 2G spectrum case, had lost his credibility with the people of India, who would be taken in by the assurances of a mere solicitor general?