The filmmaker and social activist Mahesh Bhatt in an article in Times wrote, " IB reports against NGOs are more sinister in intent than in content".While narrating this he added that : " IB is yet to come clean on its dubious role in the Ishrat Jahan fake encounter case and all indications suggest that it's being jealously protected by the home ministry from being prosecuted by CBI on the pretext of a case diary . I have a simple question: why leak reports when the law of the land could have been simply applied in the event of any violation by NGOs or anyone for that matter? It's my strong belief that reports don't get leaked in the media but are planted with a purpose."
Mahesh Bhatt said, "The timing of IB reports against NGOs is not just suspect but it also underscores a far more troubling trend the mandarins in Delhi won't tolerate anything that's not convenient for their corporate driven agenda. NGOs are not just an exception. The manner in which former solicitor general Gopal Subramanium's name was dropped from the list of names for judgeship for the Supreme Court and weeding out of bureaucrats holding key positions during the UPA regime exude a vindictive mindset."
INDIA HONEST cannot understand how Bhatt has drawn a line of similarity between the IB's role in Ishrat Jahan case and IB's role in reporting on NGO's activities. Even if one agrees with what Bhatt wrote then it implies that what one set of officers has done in Isharat case is to be taken as improper, but on the other hand how it implies to what another set of officers has diagnosed on the role of NGO's down the line only after so many years ?
Do Bhatt meant that the whole IB office of last one decade has rotten ? After all IB is one of the premier investigative agency of the nation and how one can conclude to demean the agency, only to please the NGOs,whose activities have been found to be suspective to national interest ?
Moreover the filmmaker Mahesh Bhatt himself cannot escape from the alleged "corporate driven agenda", if at all he wishes to stick on it. One may be surprised to note one fact that the wealthy and the corporate world owned real estate properties and posh bungalows cover 8 to 10 % of the total residential space available in Mumbai and that is occupied for residence by less than 1% of those persons.
INDIA HONEST suggests that if civil activism is raised to a higher level among these wealthy corporates to spare the extra space then the whole problem of slums can be solved in Mumbai, and one hope Bhatt can play an effective and leading role in this noble task as a CSR and a true civil activist's act.
Yes Bhatt is true that former solicitor general Gopal Subramanium's name should not have been dropped from the list of names for judgeship for the Supreme Court in spite of the adverse IB report . Yes as per Bhatt sir's advice the Modi government should have copied what Manmohan Singh had done.UPA government has forced the then collegian led by Justice Lahoti to accept the posting of Justice Ashok Kumar in spite of disent within for the adverse IB report of corruption charges on him, as it is now revealed by Justice Katju.
The filmmaker and social activist Mahesh Bhatt has again misinterpreted the fact, when he accused Modi government for weeding out of bureaucrats holding key positions during the UPA regime. Please note it, Mr. Bhatt sir that how the government works : the elected politician are posted as Ministers and they run the government work only with the active support of the bureaucracy. These UPA ministers have been rejected by the people for their acts.
So if the ministers are kicked out by the people for their wrong acts, how the supportive bureaucrats may escape their part of role in running the government. Bhatt sir, instead of accusing others for a vindictive mindset , please come clean to yourself and stop whitewashing the wrongs of many of these disguised NGO's.