Govt disclosure of 90 Netaji mystery records has a whiff of cover-up

Home Ministry's "selected" release is first of its kind under RTI Act

Records include Intelligence Bureau reports, Ministry of External Affairs' telegrams & prime ministerial correspondence. One note by Prime Minister Nehru will remain classified.


After one and half years of RTI efforts which led to a landmark Central Information Commission decision and discussions among the highest echelons of power in the country, the Ministry of Home Affairs has released to Mission Netaji 90 documents relating to the mystery surrounding the death of Subhas Chandra Bose.

The MHA had earlier said it could not provide Bose-related records, with the Union Home Secretary himself expressing fears that disclosure could lead to law and order problem in the country -- especially in Bose's home state West Bengal.

That certain classified documents should be released under the fledgling right to information regime makes for a good news in secrecy-obsessive India, but there are no more glad tidings. The MHA's disclosure appears to be selective, with too many missing links. More

RTI effect: Netaji papers to be released

RTI effect: Netaji papers to be released

Hindustan Times Special

Aloke Tikku
New Delhi, November 4

The government is finally preparing to make public a selection of secret and controversial documents relating to Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose’s reported death and subsequent events.

The documents include communications to and from then Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru and the chiefs of intelligence, which had been given to the Shah Nawaz Khan Committee of 1956 and Justice GD Khosla Commission of 1970.

Both had concluded that Netaji died in an air crash in August 1945, a conclusion trashed by the Justice M.K. Mukherjee Commission in its November 2005 report.

The documents were never allowed to be made public for the next four decades. Till July, the Union Home Ministry also staved off attempts to release them under the Right To Information law saying the documents sought were voluminous, top secret in nature and may lead to chaos in the country if disclosed.

But a Central Information Commission decision in the same month has helped bring about the change in its assessment.

Officials said the Shivraj Patil-led Home Ministry had come around to the view that there really was no fear of a law and order problem if the secret documents were revealed.

Last week, Patil moved the Cabinet Committee of Political Affairs to seek a decision on releasing the files.

Sources said the committee was, in principle, inclined to make the documents public but had sought some clarifications from the bureaucracy before putting its seal of approval.

There were concerns that people may read parts of the communication out of context, which could result in a controversy that would necessarily have political overtones.

But the overall view was the worst that the Congress-led coalition government may have to face was a controversy that would die a natural death.

But Anuj Dhar of Mission Netaji — the organisation that used the information law to seek access to the confidential Netaji papers — said he had his doubts if the ministry would declassify the whole lot comprising thousands of papers.

“They will hold back the sensitive papers,” said Dhar who authored Back from Dead: Inside the Subhas Bose Mystery, questioning the official plane crash version.

He had obtained information from the government in Taiwan in 2003, which claimed that no plane carrying Netaji had ever crashed there.


Related MN link: Official Secrets Act era gone; disclose Netaji records CIC tells Govt

"PMO not bound to disclose list of secret Netaji files"

Prime Minister's Office has informed Central Information Commission that it is under no obligation under the RTI Act to disclose information relating to list of secret files on Subhas Chandra Bose. The assertion follows the CIC's notice to PMO over an appeal by Mission Netaji's Anuj Dhar, who sought the list in October last year, but was denied.

"Disclosure of information relating to list of classified files being held in this office will prejudicially affect relations with foreign countries, writes PMO's Central Public Information Officer Kamal Dayani. "In view of that, there was no obligation for this office to disclose information to this information seeker."

PMO wants the appeal to CIC "be dismissed as not maintainable" because it seeks information protected by Sections 8(1)(a) and (f) of the RTI Act.

Dhar had asked the PMO to confirm if they were holding several classified records/materials on Subhas Bose, and requested for descriptive lists of classified and unclassified records. He also inquired if the PMO had any plan to transfer these records/materials to the National Archives.

In reply, the PMO furnished a list of unclassified files (see below) and stated that "an exercise was underway to review classified files held by PMO for declassification and on declassification such files would be sent to National Archives". There was no word on the classified (secret) files.

Subsequently, Dhar approached the Appellate Authority in the PMO only to be told that the details about classified files cannot be provided.

In his appeal to CIC, Dhar argued that "it defies common sense as to how the disclosure of a mere list of files on and about a national hero, whom the Government holds to have died more than 60 years ago in an accident, can prejudicially affect relations with foreign countries in 2006-2007".

RTI makes PMO release info about "Panditji's file" on Netaji

But no clue who ordered its destruction & why

A CIC decision has led to partial disclosure by the PMO of papers relating to the destruction of an alleged file on the enquires made by former Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru about the whereabouts of Subhas Chandra Bose. The bunch comprises notes from secret files, letter by Prime Minister Indira Gandhi and recent correspondence between Mukherjee Commission and Prime Minister's Office under Atal Bihari Vajpayee.

Obtained under the Right to Information, a selection from these papers the papers can be seen here.

File 12(226)/56-PM titled Investigation into the circumstances leading to the death of Subhas Bose was described by Justice Mukherjee Commission of Inquiry (1999-2005) as one which could have been of "great assistance" in resolving the controversy surrounding Bose's disappearance. It was destroyed "during routine process of review/weeding of old records" -- as Kamal Dayani, PMO's Central Public Information Officer, informed Anuj Dhar of Mission Netaji in September last year.

Dhar took the matter to Central Information Commission (CIC). Last month, Chief Information Commissioner Wajahat Habibullah directed the Prime Minister's Office to provide certain documents identified by Dhar. The PMO obliged, and so the contours of a shocking tale emerge.

More...

Russia says no, but CIC wants Netaji correspondence

A virtual tug of war has been set off between the Central Information Commission and the Russian Foreign Ministry what with the latter disallowing disclosure of Netaji fate related correspondence and the former wanting that they be revealed. And caught in between is the Ministry of Affairs, clearly on the Russian side and unwilling to declassify the correspondence.

The development follows after a hearing before Information Commissioner Dr OP Kajeriwal on 10 August 2007. During the hearing, the MEA conveyed to the CIC that "according to the correspondence received from the Embassy of India, Moscow, the Russian Foreign Office has stated that the documents handed over by them in June 2001 were meant only for the GOI's official use and for the work of the Commission in investigations into the disappearance of Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose."

This reply was contested by Dhar, present at hearing, who said "the Ministry itself admits to have taken up the matter with the Soviets and the Russians. I want that correspondence. I want it all. Not just some documents handed over in 2001."

Taking a considerate view, the CIC, in its decision released yesterday evening, stated that "the Commission accepted this request (of Dhar's) and directed the Respondents to clearly mention this while seeking the approval of the Russian authorities for disclosure of this material.

"Commission ....is all for disclosure of this material to the Appellant. However, it advises the Ministry of External Affairs to seek a formal clearance from the Russian Authorities in the matter."

Background: In August 2006, Mission Netaji sought "copies of the complete correspondence the MEA has had with the Governments of the USSR and the Russian Federation over the disappearance of Netaji" and the information whether the "MEA sought information from the Russians by issuing mere note verbales, or some serious efforts were ever made from a higher level." Admitting that the matter had been taken up with the Russians "through the diplomatic channels at appropriate level", the Ministry, however, declined to divulge the correspondence citing Clause 8(1) (a) & (f) of the RTI Act.

The clause cited by the Ministry has it that the Government may not disclose "information received in confidence from foreign Government" and the "information, disclosure of which would prejudicially affect the sovereignty and integrity of India, the security, strategic ... interests of the State, relation with foreign State".

Similar position was maintained by then Appellate Authority in the Ministry after Dhar wrote to him in September seeking a review of the decision. Thereafter, the matter was taken to the Central Information Commission (CIC). On 23 March 2007, the Bench of Information Commissioner Dr OP Kejariwal heard the views of Dhar and Ministry officials Ajai Choudhary, Additional Secretary (PP), and AK Nag, Joint Secretary & CPIO.

Ticking off the Ministry for summarily dismissing Dhar's request, the Commission ordered them to "have this correspondence examined", "take a firm decision". Making things complex for the MEA, the Commission added that in case they felt that the relations between India and Russia were going to be affected, "the Commission would like the issue to be settled only after a reference has been made to the Government of Russia."

Media coverage: Zee, Sify, Jagran

Secrets of "Netaji's ashes" to remain secret

Official version has it that Subhas Chandra Bose was killed following an air crash and cremated in Taipei. The Mukherjee Commission found out that the crash was a cover for his escape to the USSR and body of a Japanese soldier was passed off as Bose's. Be that as it may, what really became of the ashes? The official version is that they were taken to Tokyo's Renkoji temple, where they remain till date.

And there is yet another "official" version tucked away in a classified Prime Minister's Office (PMO) file: They were secretly received in India by Prime Minister/External Affairs Minister Jawaharlal Nehru. Going by the tone of this 1954 note (see above), those "ashes and other remains" might have ended up either in South Block or the office of All India Congress Committee (AICC).

Now it seems that we will never know how true or false the PMO version is. After a year-long RTI attempt, Mission Netaji has failed to resolve the riddle of "Netaji's remains" the PMO record says were received by Pt Nehru. The Central Information Commission (CIC), after hearing the views of Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) and Mission Netaji's Anuj Dhar, has stated that it "can only hope that some serious researcher will look into one of the greatest mysteries of modern India and arrive at a definite conclusion". What drove Information Commission Dr OP Kejariwal to make this gloomy observation was the MEA's insistence that "they had no records with them on the matter and hence could not proceed any further with the RTI-application."

Dr Kejariwal, however, underlined in his decision dated 26 July 2007 that "one look at the note emanating from the Prime Minister's Secretariat ... would seem to open up an altogether new line of inquiry with the implication that Netaji's ashes and other remains were brought back to the country by the late Prime Minister, Pt. Jawaharlal Nehru."

A top notch historian that he is, Dr Kejariwal was compelled to concede in his order that "this is one of the most interesting cases which has come before the Commission" and that "the mystery deepens". Full story

Click for the CIC decision

Media coverage: Hindustantimes.com, Jagran, Outlook

The uncertain fate of revered Indian nationalist "Netaji" Subhas Chandra Bose has long been a cause celebre that has gripped the subcontinent since his sudden disappearance in 1945. Did he die in an aircraft crash in Taipei? Or flee to the Soviet Union, only to vanish in the gulag? Or reappear as an enigmatic holy man in northern India? In this exhaustively researched book, investigative journalist Anuj Dhar uncovers riveting evidence that goes a long way in unraveling the riddles, myths and cover-ups surrounding Bose's fate.

Click to read the Asia Times review by Sreeram Chaulia

Related link: A must read; an absoloute thriller ...

Official Secrets Act era gone; disclose Netaji records: CIC tells Govt

Why keep records secret if Bose had died in 1945?: Mission Netaji

Disclosure of Top Secret records will lead to chaos in country: MHA

Matter is of a serious national importance: Central Information Commission

In a major boost for the freedom of information movement in India, the full Bench of Central Information Commission (CIC) has ruled that the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) must declassify records relating to Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose's reported death.

The CIC set aside the MHA's contention that disclosure "may lead to a serious law and order problem in the country, especially in West Bengal" as "facile hypothesis" which "seems to be a position repeated without any discernable application of mind".

The Bench comprising Chief Information Commissioner Wajahat Habibullah and Information Commissioners Padma Balasubramanian, AN Tiwari, Dr OP Kejariwal and Prof MM Ansari hammered in that the matter was of "wide public concern and therefore of national importance" and rejected the Home Ministry's "considered view" to not to "supply the documents relating to various Commissions of Inquiry on disappearance of Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose in public interest".

The documents had been sought in June last year when Sayantan Dasgupta of Mission Netaji requested the MHA to "make available authenticated copies of documents used as exhibits by the Shah Nawaz Khan and GD Khosla panels".

The idea was to better the understanding about the conclusion drawn by these panels since the Government held their findings true even after receiving the latest report of Justice MK Mukherjee, a top criminal law expert and former judge of the Supreme Court of India. Full Story

Related links: CIC order (Jump to most important part), The man who put MHA in a spot; God forbid this should be true; Need to know

Media coverage: IBN Live; Indian Express, BBC Hindi, Jagran, Nav Bharat Times, Zee, NDTV, Gulf News, Hindu, Sahara Samay

American NGO sees similarities between Bose-Wallenberg cases

International Raoul Wallenberg Foundation (IRWF) has spotted "similarities between the cases of Netaji and Raoul Wallenberg". In a communication to Mission Netaji, New York-based IRWF has highlighted the poignant story of Wallenberg, a famed Swedish diplomat who saved one lakh Jews in 1944 before his sudden disappearance from Budapest.

"He was never seen again in the free world after January 1945, when the Soviet, who had just entered Budapest, abducted and imprisoned Wallenberg," IRWF stated.

As per the findings of Mukherjee Commission, in August 1945 Bose disappeared while making good his escape to the Soviet Russia.

Just was the case with Bose, rumours of whose incarceration in the USSR gathered pace in subsequent years, Wallenberg was reported to be in Soviet confinement for decades.

And just as Bose's kin and admirers strove to get to the truth, Wallenberg's family, supporters worldwide and the Swedish Government made unrelenting, proactive efforts to ascertain what had become of him. The moment also got a major fillip in the US, where one of the person saved by Wallenberg, Tom Lantos, took the battle to the US Congress. Lantos became instrumental in making Wallenberg the second person in history to have been made an honoury US citizen.

"In a way Congressman Lantos, who has made headlines in India recently due to his tough posturing on Indo-Iran relations, is like late Prof Samar Guha, who waged a battle in Parliament with the help of the likes of Atal Bihari Vajpayee," says Chandrachur Ghose of Mission Netaji.

The IRWF communication comes at a time when Mission Netaji's Anuj Dhar is expecting the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) to release their correspondence with the Russians over Netaji's fate following an order of the Central Information Commission (CIC). Dhar had sought the correspondence under the RTI Act. After being denied the same by the ministry, he complained to the CIC. In March this year, the CIC ordered that the Ministry would have to release the papers "latest by 30 June 2007" and "would like the issue to be settled only after a reference has been made to the Government of Russia" should the Government fear that the relations between the two nations "would be affected through the disclosure of this information".

Dhar says that the similarities between Bose-Wallenberg cases end when one compares "the mala fide intentions of the Indian Government with the bona fides of the Swedes".

The moment the Swedish Government got the information that Raoul Wallenberg could have been captured in the USSR, they took up the matter with the latter at a high level. In 1947 Soviet Foreign Minister Andrei Vishinsky wrote to the Swedish government that "Wallenberg is not in the Soviet Union and is unknown to us". He also suggested that he "had either been killed in the battle for Budapest or kidnapped and murdered by Nazis or Hungarian Fascists".

Sweden, however, persisted and in 1957 USSR's Deputy Foreign Minister Andrei Gromyko did a volte-face to reveal that in 1947, Wallenberg, all of 33 then, died suddenly of a heart attack in the notorious Lubyanka prison in KGB's HQ in Moscow. This version was disbelieved.

The Subhas Bose case, as pursued by India, pales in comparison. Despite receiving the intelligence that he could be in the USSR, the Indian Government, which shared excellent rapport with the Soviets unlike the Swedes, never brought the matter on the bilateral agenda.

In 1991, when the Soviet empire was disintegrating, Sweden, backed by the US, made the best of the opportunity to form a joint commission with the Russians to go deeper into the Wallenberg question. The same year, Prime Minister Chandrshekhar's Government, surviving on Congress's support, secretly decided to bury the Netaji case for once and all.

At the end of the joint inquiry in 2001, Swedish Prime Minister Göran Persson vowed that "our efforts to obtain an answer on what really happened to Raoul Wallenberg will be continued". "These efforts must be based on the assumption that Raoul Wallenberg may have lived after 1947." He also remarked that "the main responsibility for Raoul Wallenberg's fate rests with the Soviet Government".

In strike contrast, the Indian Government, which has gone only so far as issuing note verbales (informal unsigned notes) to the Russians in recent times, summarily dismissed the report of Mukherjee Commission in just one line. That speaks volumes about their sincerity.

IRWF (http://www.raoulwallenberg.net/) is a leading organization dedicated to Raoul Wallenberg and has offices in New York, Jerusalem and Buenos Aires.

Put off hearing on destroyed Netaji file: PMO to CIC

The Prime Minister's Office (PMO) has demanded that Chief Information Officer Wajahat Habibullah puts off a scheduled hearing pertaining to a non-extant file on Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose's reported death. In a letter to Central Information Commission (CIC), Kamal Dayani, Director & Central Public Information Officer, PMO, has sought dismissal of an appeal filed by Anuj Dhar of Mission Netaji.

Dayani tells the Commission that Dhar had no "valid ground to rush to CIC before exhausting the 1st appeal under the RTI Act".

Dhar, who promptly e-mailed a rejoinder to the CIC, maintains that the PMO's demand "amounts to questioning the Commission's considered decision" and that his "request was handled casually by the PMO," forcing him to move to the CIC.

According to Dhar, PMO was "not willing to give a straight answer to a pointed question".

Dhar originally requested the Cabinet Secretariat to furnish copies of "all papers concerning the destruction" of PMO file titled "Investigation into the circumstances leading to the death of Shri Subhas Chandra Bose". The Cabinet Secretariat forwarded his request to the Prime Minister's Office, which replied that file "was destroyed in 1972, during routine process of review/weeding of old records."

Thereafter Dhar complained to the CIC that rather than giving details/copies of papers concerning the destruction of the file, Dayani's letter merely reiterated what had been stated by him in the application itself. He also cited a letter from PMO to Mukherjee Commission stating that the Cabinet Secretariat might be holding some relevant records about the destroyed file.

"The application was filed to understand the circumstances in which a sensitive PMO file dealing with the highly controversial fate of a national hero was destroyed at a time when a judicial inquiry (Khosla Commission) into the matter was on. It is very suspicious that the 'routine process of review/weeding of old records' overlooked this and the file was destroyed along with some useless records. Commonsense dictates that such a historically important record should have been preserved for posterity and transferred to National Archives in due course," Dhar wrote to CIC.

Thereafter, the CIC issued a notice for hearing on 10 August and sought PMO's comments. The PMO's latest letter is in the response.

Related posts: PMO asked to respond in 15 days; Team MN and the need to know

Text of the letters:

PMO to CIC (and CC to Anuj Dhar, who received the letter yesterday)

Subject: Notice for hearing of appeal under Section 19 of the RTI Act, 2005

Sir,

I am to refer to CIC's letter No CIC/WB/A/2006/00785 dated 3 May 2007 on the Subject mentioned above and to furnish comments in the matter as under.

2. Shri Anuj Dhar vide his application dated 2.8.2006 addressed to Cabinet Secretariat has sought certified copies of all papers concerning the destruction of file No. 12(226)/56-PM titled "Investigation into the circumstances leading to the death of Shri Subhas Chandra Bose". The application was transferred to PMO by the Cabinet Secretariat vide their letter dated 17.8.2006 to provide the requisite information to the applicant.

3. CPIO, PMO vide his letter No RTI/219/2006-PMA dated 4.9.2006 replied to the applicant that the said file was destroyed in 1972 during routine process of review/weeding of old records. This reply clearly certified that the file has been destroyed. It is a fact that the letter of CPIO did not mention the details of the Appellate Authority to whom appeal against the reply of CPIO lies. However, the applicant could have easily ascertained the details of the 1st appellate authority which was given in the PMO website or telephonically from the CPIO whose telephone number was given in the reply. In view of this, there is valid ground to rush to CIC before exhausting the 1st appeal under the RTI Act.

4. In view of the foregoing, his appeal to CIC may be dismissed as not maintainable and he may be advised to exhaust the 1st appeal provision.

Yours faithfully

Kamal Dayani
Director & CPIO
Prime Minister's Office

Dhar to CIC (e-mailed today)

I received yesterday letter No. RTI/219/2006-PMA dated 17 May 2007 from Shri Kamal Dayani, Director & Central Public Information Officer, PMO, in response to the Commission Notice for hearing of appeal dated May 3, 2007 over F. No. CIC/WB/A/2006/00785.

As such, I have the following submissions to make:

1. Shri Dayani wants that my appeal to the CIC be "dismissed as not maintainable". I should think that such a demand, coming after the issuance of the notice, amounts to questioning the honourable Commission's considered decision.

2. Shri Dayani's latest letter, which I find somewhat patronizing, provides yet another instance that the PMO is not willing to give a straight answer to a pointed question.

3. I was constrained to bring the matter before the Commission not merely because Shri Dayani's earlier response had not referred to the name of the first Appellate Authority -- the onus of providing whose name was on him under the RTI Act -- but because it appeared to me that my request was handled casually by the PMO. A quick read of Shri Dayani's curt answer dated 4 September 2006 would bear this out.

4. I had specifically requested the Cabinet Secretariat for "certified copies of all papers concerning the destruction of file No. 12(226)/56-PM". According to a letter dated 4 July 2000 to the Justice Mukherjee Commission of Inquiry (1999-2005), by Director, PMO, " file No 12(226)/56-PM which contained agenda paper/cabinet decision regarding 'Investigation into the circumstances leading to the death of Shri Subhas Chandra Bose' was destroyed in 1972 in the course of routine review/weeding of old records since records of Cabinet proceedings are kept permanently in Cabinet Secretariat, from where they may be procured". (Emphasis added)

5. However, the Cabinet Secretariat passed the matter to the PMO. PMO wrote to me, and is reiterating yet again, that the said file was destroyed. A look at my request would show that I never sought this information as the fact of the destruction of file was already known to me, and indeed I had mentioned the same in my request. I had requested for papers concerning the destruction of the file.

6. I, therefore, feel that no useful purpose would be served by my taking up this matter with the Appellate Authority, PMO, other than unnecessarily prolonging it. I'd also request the honourable Commission to direct the PMO to ascertain facts about the above stated "agenda paper/cabinet decision" from the Cabinet Secretariat before their representative appears at the hearing on 10 August.

Netaji report: Court gives Government more time

Centre fighting shy of filing affidavit in opposition

Won't take it lying down: Rudra Jyoti Bhattacharjee

Chief Justice Surinder Singh Nijjar and Justice Pinaki Chandra Ghose of the Calcutta High Court today gave the Union Government two more weeks to file their response over their rejection of Mukherjee Commission report.

A Writ petition was filed early this year by lawyer Rudra Jyoti Bhattacharjee and eight others before the Court. The petitioners named the Principal Secretary (Prime Minister's Office), the Secretary (Ministry of Home Affairs) and Justice Manoj Kumar Mukherjee (retired judge of the Supreme Court of India) as respondents.

For those who are wondering what's all this -- in May last year the Government had made public the report of Justice MK Mukherjee. Attested to it was one-page Action Taken Report prepared by the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) saying that "the Government have examined the Report submitted by the Commission on 8th November, 2005 in detail and have not agreed with the finding that - (a) Netaji did not die in the plane crash; and (b) The ashes in the Renkoji Temple were not of Netaji." (Meaning thereby that he did die in the air crash, as Pandit Nehru would say, and the ashes are his).

Since the Commission was set up on an order of the Calcutta High Court, it was but natural that the same court be approached again. So the man who had originally moved the Court, did it again. Lawayer Rudra Jyoti Bhattacharjee pleaded before the Court to set aside the Action Taken Report for it was "totally unacceptable according to settled principle of law".

Rudra and co-petitions, all of whom have been supporting Mission Netaji, stated in the petition that "unless an Order setting aside the impugned Action Taken Report is passed … the nation shall be deprived of exact information regarding mysterious disappearance of Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose, which is admittedly a definite matter of public importance".

When the case was admitted in February, the Government counsel remarked that the Centre had incurred "unnecessary expenditure" on Mukherjee Commission. This angered the Acting Chief Justice B Bhattacharya, who retorted that the Government should have objected when the Court had issued order for the formation of the Commission in 1998.

Justice Bhattacharya gave the Central Government a period of 6 weeks to file their response explaining why they rejected Justice Mukherjee's report. However no response was filed by the Government. Then, the new Chief Justice gave the Government further time, but still no answer came. Same story was repeated today.

Related links: Govt stand legally untenable; The Action Taken Report

Destroyed Netaji file: PMO asked to respond in 15 days

CIC Wajahat Habibullah also calls a hearing in August


Something suspicious happened in the Prime Minister's Office (PMO) in 1972, when GD Khosla Commission was inquiring into Subhas Chandra Bose's reported death. As a former Minister was to put it years later -- "Nehru's file on Netaji was destroyed on orders of PN Haksar, the Secretary to Prime Minister Indira Gandhi".

Cut to our times. In 2000, Mukherjee Commission asked the PMO to produce file 12(226)/56-PM titled "Investigation into the circumstances leading to the death of Subhas Chandra Bose". The Commission was told by Director of the PMO that "the above file was not available as it had been destroyed". The Commission thereafter asked the Director "to intimate to the Commission the subject and contents of the above file and the circumstances under which the said file had been destroyed".

The PMO replied: "File No 12(226)/56-PM which contained agenda paper/cabinet decision regarding "Investigation into the circumstances leading to the death of Shri Subhas Chandra Bose" was destroyed in 1972 in the course of routine review/weeding of old records since records of Cabinet proceedings are kept permanently in Cabinet Secretariat, from where they may be procured".

In 2006 Mission Netaji picked up threads, and Anuj Dhar requested the Cabinet Secretariat to furnish copies of "all papers concerning the destruction" of this file. However, notwithstanding the above assertion made by the PMO Director that "records of Cabinet proceedings are kept permanently in Cabinet Secretariat", the Secretariat passed the buck saying the matter "pertains to Prime Minister's Office".

The PMO, in turn, informed Dhar that the file "was destroyed in 1972, during routine process of review/weeding of old records." Dissatisfied, Dhar reported the following to Central Information Commission (CIC).

* The application seeking "certified copies of all papers concerning the destruction of file" has not been not answered. Rather than giving details/copies of the such papers, the PMO 's letter merely reiterates what was stated in the application itself.

* The application was filed to understand the circumstances in which a sensitive PMO file dealing with the highly controversial fate of a national hero was destroyed at a time when a judicial inquiry into the matter was on. It is very suspicious that the "routine process of review/weeding of old records" overlooked this and the file was destroyed along with some useless records. Commonsense dictates that such a historically important record should have been preserved for posterity and transferred to National Archives in due course. Therefore … Cabinet Secretariat and PMO should release detailed information and papers on the process of the destruction of the file.

Taking cognizance of the issue, Chief Information Commissioner Wajahat Habibullah has now directed PMO officials to "appear before the Central Information Commission in the Court Room of the Commission … with relevant documents on August 10, 2007".

The PMO has also been directed to offer their comments on the appeal within 15 days.

Netaji groups call for proper evaluation of freedom fighters

Peeved by the disclosure that the Government has no record of Subhas Chandra Bose's contribution to the freedom struggle, two Kolkata-based organizations have deplored that the "role played by the revolutionaries is not evaluated by the state".

Netaji Study Centre & Jayasree Foundation remarked: "We are stunned to learn that there is no document on Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose and our freedom movement in the Home (Political) Department, Government of India. Is it not an open conspiracy against the freedom fighters who sacrificed at the altar of Bharatmata?"

"We are also amazed at the attempt to highlight the role only one family to attain freedom," they added.

The groups have demanded that "a National Movement should immediately be started to raise the issue nationwide. All documents on Netaji and other freedom fighters should be properly maintained and made available for the public especially the researchers. The design … to ignore Netaji and other revolutionaries should immediately be crushed".

The groups will raise this and related issues at a public meeting to be organized on May 26, 5.30 pm, at Sarat Smriti Sadan, Triangular Park, Rashbehari Avenue, Kolkata on the occasion of 106th Birth Anniversary of revolutionary and Netaji's associate Anil Roy.

See TOI story: No record of Netaji's role in freedom struggle!

The Mole & the CWC leader

In late 1945 the Viceroy of India, Field Marshal Viscount Wavell, came across an interesting report about the Congress party's real stance on the Indian National Army (INA) men facing trial. Things appeared to have come a full circle. From assailing Subhas Bose, the Congress leaders had come around to hailing the INA men, including nanaji (grandfather) of cine star Shah Rukh Khan. Wavell came to know why, courtesy the Military Intelligence (MI).

The dope came from a "loyal" British Indian Army Captain who first joined the INA, switched sides after the war and gave evidence against the INA men. This mole told MI that Congress's change of heart had to do with "political expediency" rather than any love for their ousted former president or the people who fought under his command. He sourced the information to a leading Congress Working Committee member and a well-known Jawaharlal Nehru acolyte.

Before taking a stand on the INA issue, Congress sent the CWC leader on a recce mission to gauge public feeling. He traveled across India to discover that people were overwhelmingly in support of the INA. "This inflamed feeling forced Congress to take the line it did," the mole revealed to MI.

In his free-wheeling talks with the mole, the CWC member blurted out that "Congress leaders had realised that those who joined the INA were far from innocents", adding that Nehru made it a point to refer to them as "misguided men"' in his speeches. He in fact felt that as and when Congress came to power, they "would have no hesitation in removing all INA from the Services and even in putting some of them on trial". The mole asked the CWC member why couldn't the Congress "repudiate their championship of the INA" when they knew "the true facts"? To this, he replied that "they dare not take this line as they would lose much ground in the country".

The mole had a whale of time in free India and retired as a general. The CWC member has a road a named after him in the Capital. As for the INA veterans, except for the turncoats, most of them never admitted into free India's armed forces and were treated like they were "stray dogs", as one veteran said.

Like sword of Damocles, CIC order hangs over MEA


This won't wash: CIC has directed MEA to release correspondence with Russia over Netaji
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It is perhaps the most overlooked RTI related news of recent times. Your favourite newspaper did not tell you this, but last month the Central Information Commission (CIC) directed the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) to release copies of their correspondence with the Soviets/Russians over the disappearance of Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose. What is more significant, and what could give the ministry the jitters, order by Information Commissioner Dr OP Kejariwal directs the Ministry to take up the matter with the Russian Government if it fears that the disclosure would harm the formidable relations between the two nations.

Dr Kejariwal passed the order after hearing out MEA officials Ajai Choudhary, Additional Secretary, AK Nag, Joint Secretary, and Anuj Dhar of Mission Netaji. Among other things, Dhar argued that in view of rampant scurrilous rumours linking all-time national greats like Pt Jawaharlal Nehru and Dr S Radhakrishnan to the Bose mystery, it would be in supreme national interest that the Ministry discloses all its records about the matter. "Not declassifying them will only aggravate such rumours," Dhar said during the hearing.

The Ministry officials had no logic to offer when they denied to Dhar the following pieces of information:

(a) Unambiguous information whether the issue of Netaji's fate or his alleged stay in the USSR was ever taken up by the MEA with the Soviets/Russians at a higher (say ministerial) level or; whether some enquiries into such a matter of national importance were made through mere note verbales, and;

(b) Certified copies of the complete correspondence in toto, covering what was asked, replies from the USSR/Russian Federation and MEA's reaction on record thereof.

In an evidently panic reaction, the Ministry refused to oblige, and stated:

(a) The information sought does not constitute an "information" as defined in the RTI Act, 2005 as it seeks anecdotal reply.

(b) The requisite copies of correspondence cannot be disclosed as it involves relations with a foreign state and is exempt as per the provisions of clause 8(10) (a)(i).

Dr Kejariwal, former Director of Nehru Memorial Museum & Library and a reputed historian, rejected the Ministry's take at the hearing, which took place on 23 March 2007. "The Commission also saw the Respondents' reply ... where ... it also said that the information was not being disclosed as it did not fall under the category of 'information' as defined in the RTI Act as it seeks 'anecdotal' reply. The Commission could not see the applicability of this answer at all in the present case."

Anuj Dhar: Will he get the correspondence?

-------------------------------------------

Dr Kejariwal then outlined his order in 3 parts:

1. The MEA will have its correspondence with USSR and Russia over Netaji's disappearance examined "by their own expert/s and if need be, by an outside expert who they can rely on and then take a firm decision".

2. In case they come to the conclusion that the disclosure of papers won't affect relations between India and Russia, the correspondence will have to be disclosed.

3. If the conclusion drawn is that the relations between India and Russia would be harmed upon disclosure of this information, the Commission would like the issue to be settled only after: i) a reference has been made to the Government of Russia; ii) the papers are shown to the Commission, which would examine the bona fide of the refusal to disclose the information.

The Ministry is to provide an answer latest by 30 June 2007. The following possibilities are likely:

1. MEA will stand by its decision to not to disclose the papers.

-- In this situation, the matter will most likely head to the court. Either the Ministry, or the CIC or Dhar, depending on the support Mission Netaji gets from people, will make the first move.

2. MEA may disclose the papers in part, given that they appear to be in tune with official Government line.

-- Mission Netaji's information is that the Ministry never tried too hard to ascertain facts from the Russians, and the Russians didn't seem to have given convincing answers. No nation in the world, least of all a former superpower, will give away its secrets upon receipt of note verbales (informal, unsigned third person notes). When you want something big, you have got to try hard - at the higher level. Like Foreign Minister of India beseechingly writing to his Soviet counterpart.

-- However, disclosure of even the incomplete correspondence will help in better understanding of the Bose case. The documents may underline the disinterested approach of the Government.

Keep your fingers crossed guys, and keep pouring in your views.

Related links: Dhar's appeal to MEA ; The CIC decision

The man who put MHA in a spot

Face off: Sayantan at the INA memorial in Singapore

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Let's start with a little quiz. Which one of the following do you think would be best suited to inquire into Netaji reported death?

1. A Congress MP; 2. A friend of Pt Nehru's, and a biographer of Indira Gandhi to boot; 3. A Supreme Court of India judge.

Unless you are one of those khandani Congress backers, chances are you will without hesitation pick option 3. But our honourable Home Minister has gone for 2. With apologies to Shivraj Patil, this is the dumbed down, lay man's version of the reason why his Ministry rejected Mukherjee Commission's report while favouring that of GD Khosla, a great writer but a lousy investigator of the case.

Coming to the point, Mission Netaji wanted to figure out how did the redoubtable Gopal Das Khosla and Shah Nawaz Khan, elevated to ministerial office after giving his report, reached conclusions that Netaji had died in an air crash in Taipei without checking up with the Taiwan Government. So, Sayantan Dasgupta filed a petition under the Right to Information Act, seeking copies of all documents exhibited by the first two panels. He was promptly denied the records under 8 1(a) of the RTI Act. By that the Home Ministry meant that the disclosure would have prejudicially affected sovereignty and integrity of India, relation with foreign states and even lead to incitement of offence.

After this point-blank refusal, Dasgupta lodged a complaint with the Central Information Commission (CIC). In the first hearing before the CIC in October last year, the Ministry officials said they were not even aware of the exhibits, as unlike the Mukherjee report the earlier reports had not appended any lists of the exhibits. Very suspicious this was, and it bespoke of the bona fides of the gentlemen named above. Information Commissioner AN Tiwari then directed Dasgupta to ask for specific documents. Abracadabra! Dasgupta furnished a copy of a classified list of 202 documents used as exhibits by the Khosla Commission in the argument session. (Click here to download your copy.)

In the next hearing the Home Ministry officials were supposed to come up with these 202 documents, but they came with excuses. "Where did you get this list from?" they asked Sayantan and Anuj, who, in a role reversal, denied the "information" to them.

By this time Commissioner Tiwari, a retired Secretary himself, had understood the gist of the matter. Berating the officials, he directed them to "sensitise" the Home Secretary about the matter and take it to the level of Prime Minister. The Commissioner gave the reasoning: "I am surprised that the Government of India is keeping documents on the death of such an illustrious son of India secret! … Records on someone's death should not be kept classified for decades … Why don't you release all the files to National Archives and let researchers draw conclusions?" The Ministry was given a good three months to furnish full details about the papers. But when they returned on 26 March 2007, the officials were armed merely with a secret letter from Home Secretary VK Duggal (since retired). The letter stated that papers relating to Netaji's death could not disclosed for fear of causing unrest in the country, specially in Bengal. (The lead story in Bengali newspaper Bartaman below captured the point. You may also see the Hindu story.)

Obviously for Commissioner Tiwari it was nonsensical, yet again. Giving "a final chance" to the Ministry, he told the officials that "this chapter of secrecy over Netaji-related documents will have to end." Tiwari told Sayantan (accompanied by Chandrachur this time) that he is taking the matter to the full bench of the CIC headed by Chief Information Commissioner Wajahat Habibullah.

We foresee the following scenario in coming days:

* A full bench hearing may cause discomfort to the Government as the last thing they want is a controversy about this old djinn they think they have firmly put back in the bottle. Contrary to what most people think, the mention of Subhas Bose death issue increases heart beats on the Raisina Hill. For reasons unknown, almost everyone has made up their mind that there is something horrendous in it. Try it yourself, and you will know.

* The CIC, in all likelihood, would order the Ministry to disclose the records.

* The Ministry will never disclose more relevant records. That is, they may show some "harmless" records but the question of releasing sensitive ones doesn't arise.

* If pushed to the wall, the Ministry will move to Delhi High Court. They may even take a stay order even before the hearing takes place.

* Chances are that the CIC will take on them in the Court.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Also see: Team MN & need to know

A brief history of governmental flip-flop on Netaji mystery

Mum's the word! Even though he admires Netaji, Dr Manmohan Singh has not spoken out why his Government rejected Mukherjee Commission report.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

24 April 2007

By Anuj Dhar

The year 1997 was a watershed for Netaji mystery. The Calcutta High Court was approached by lawyer Rudra Jyoti Bhattacharjee, who wanted the Government to take some actions over the Subhas Bose death case. While the court heard arguments and counterarguments, it came to know what exactly the Central Government thought of the matter: "The Government of India has … maintained and is maintaining even now that a further probe is required and the information that Netaji died in the plane crash on August 18, 1945 is full of loopholes, contradictions and therefore inconclusive."

With that background in mind, Chief Justice Prabha Shankar Mishra ordered the Central Government on 30 April 1998 that it should "launch a vigorous enquiry in accordance with law by appointing, if necessary, a Commission of Inquiry as a special case for the purpose of giving an end to the controversy".

After an year of deliberations, in which the then Home Minister LK Advani, Home Secretary Kamal Pande, Principal Secretary to the Prime Minister Brajesh Mishra, Attorney General Soli Sorabjee took a leading part, the Government agreed and notified that "Central Government is of the opinion that it is necessary to appoint a Commission of Inquiry for the purpose of making an in-depth inquiry into a definitive matter of public importance". It also underlined that "there is widespread feeling among the public that the issue of finding the truth about Netaji still remains".

That same notification dated 14 April 1999 assigned the following points of inquiry to the Commission headed by Justice MK Mukherjee, a retired judge of the Supreme Court of India: (a) whether Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose is dead or alive; (b) if he is dead, whether he died in the plane crash, as alleged; (c) whether the ashes in the Japanese temple are ashes of Netaji; (d) whether he has died in any other manner at any other place and, if so, when and how; (e) if he is alive, in respect of his whereabouts.

Even a casual look at the above would convince any reasonable person that the Government in 1999 had no clue about Netaji's fate. And nor were they in a position to confirm whether or not the ashes in Tokyo were of Netaji's. Or else, there was no need to put all these queries to the Commission.

Quite naturally, the Government did not make a case of its own before Mukherjee Commission as the inquiry proceeded. Soon, evidence contrary to the air crash theory emerged and, as a result, in February 2005 the Government's counsel had to argue against the Taipei crash theory during the argument session. So much so, the counsel gave the Government of India the credit for helping confirm the information, originally obtained by yours truly, from Taiwan Government that no plane carrying Bose had ever crashed in Taipei.

Then twist in the tale came. Justice Mukherjee submitted his report to Home Minister in November 2005, concluding that there was no air crash, Netaji flew towards the USSR and the ashes kept in the Renkoji Temple were of a Japanese solider. Logically speaking, this vindicated the stand taken by three successive Governments, viz, United Front, NDA and the Congress, which was firmly in the saddle when the Government counsel made the above submissions. So, don't you think that there was some sort of partisan politics during the Vajpayee era. The BJP seems to be in unison with the Congress over the Subhas Bose death case. That's why you haven't heard anything on this matter from their senior leaders, with the notable exception of Dr Murli Manohar Joshi.

Coming back to the moot point, the Government took more than 7 months to study the report and did a somersault. They rejected the main finding in a single line and, in a way, asserted that Netaji had died following an air crash in Taipei, and the ashes in Renkoji temple were indeed his. The nation was not told what new information had come their way in those months warranting them to change their-long standing stance supported by the finding of a commission of inquiry appointed by them following a court order.

Lawyers can tell better, but I should think that the Government's action is legally untenable and it would be a travesty of justice to let it prevail.

Anuj Dhar is the author of Back from Dead: Inside the Subhas Bose Mystery

The need to know

On verification of the classified files (on Subhas Bose) held by PMO, it is held that their disclosure will prejudicially affect relations with foreign countries - Sanjay Mitra, Joint Secretary to Prime Minister Dr Manmohan Singh to Anuj Dhar of Mission Netaji in December 2006.

Standing up for truth: (From left) Sayantan, Anuj & Chandrachur

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In June last year, when the Right to Information (RTI) had just begun to catch the fancy of the nation, some guys in Delhi thought to try it out on old mystery surrounding the "death" of Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose. The idea was both novel and bold -- because till now the RTI had mostly been used by disgruntled employees or troubled citizens to redress personal issues. Not many thought that the RTI could be utilised to seek concealed facts concerning events that shaped the destiny of India.

Anuj Dhar, Chandrachur Ghose and Sayantan Dasgupta gave it a shot. And unlike most cases, they engaged not some petty officials, but the Prime Minister's Office, Ministry of External Affairs, Ministry of Home Affairs and even the elusive but know-all R&AW, India's premier external intelligence agency. All this, without any assistance from any quarter.

However, the results have so far been shocking, to put it mildly. The Manmohan Singh Government have shown suspicious reluctance in disclosing even the rudimentary records. Of course they admit -- skeptics please note -- that they are maintaining secret records on Netaji. One wonders why they would be doing so. But whatever it is, it's no indicator of any forlorn love for Subhas Bose. The entire nation knows how Netaji's legacy was treated in free India. You don't need the RTI to figure that out.

Team MN with Netaji's daughter Dr Anita Pfaff

Come to think of it, the Government's refusal to disclose records pertaining to Subhas Bose relate to transparency in governance. We need to know truth not because we now have a right to know, but because we want to understand our present better in the light of recent past. If the system can shut it self up over such a long-drawn, high-profile case, it may as well ignore many other vital issues.

The establishment's retrogressive panache for secrecy, exemplified by the Subhas Bose case, must end. Keeping things under wraps forever is not something that the mature democracies indulge in. The Government of India should realize that this is 2007 and the people of India are now mature enough to seek and accept truth. World over an era has long dawned that stipulates that all information is to be made available to people unless there are strong reasons for withholding it. One wonders what could be the reason in the instance of Subhas Bose, who the Government holds to have died more than 60 years ago.

God forbid this should be true!

An Indian Ambassador was allowed to meet Bose -- on the condition that he would not try to speak to him. When the Ambassador wondered about what to do in case Bose wished to speak to him, "he was told that it has been taken care of," … A rather ominous bit of hospitality. -- Reported in Hindustan Times dated 4 March 2001.

Extracts:

But when a well-known researcher contacted Mikhael Gorbachev, the former premier evaded a direct answer, and is alleged to have said it was up to both governments (Russia and India) to solve the issue once and for all.

A former head of the Foreign Security Service (the old KGB) has indicated to a prominent researcher that files in Russian archives do contain detailed information -- but the onus is on the Indian Government to show more interest.

Have you lately been tormented by the fate that befell Subhas Chandra Bose? Could you picture him as a captive in a Siberian gulag, while he is presumed dead by fellow Indians? India's biggest nightmare involving the biggest names isn't over as yet. The recent inquiry of Mukherjee Commission confirmed that the story of Netaji's death in a plane crash was a camouflage for his escape to the Soviet Russia. And what was the Government's reaction to this finding of a reputed ex-judge of the Supreme Court of India? Steeped in premeditated views, they summarily dismissed it. And not many voices were raised.

Doesn't this outrage you? Is this the way to handle the matter of the life and death of the man Gandhiji called 'Prince among Patriots'? Is passage of time any excuse for condoning gross injustice? After what Subhas did for us, wouldn't we be displaying ungratefulness taking things lying down?

Oh, don't you think this concerns Bose only. Modern India's longest running political controversy has had some terrible spillovers. If a shiver hasn't gone down your spine already, see this old clipping:

Most of us do not have the guts to accept it publicly, but scandalous rumours about Gandhiji, Pt Jawaharlal Nehru, President Radhakrishnan vis-à-vis Netaji disappearance controversy and others are commonplace. Need another sample? Here's something from the Big Story above:

Shyam Lal Jain, the confidential secretary of Asaf Ali, who was the secretary to INA Defence Committee told the Khosla Commission under oath that on 26 or 27 December 1945 he was summoned to Ali's residence by Nehru. Jain alleged that Pandit Nehru had asked him make typed copies of a hand- written note that said Bose had reached Russia via Diren. He also alleged that Pandit Nehru asked him to type a letter to British Prime Minister Atlee, that " Bose, your war criminal, has been allowed to enter Russian territory by Stalin. This is a clear treachery and betrayal of faith by Russians, as Russia has been an ally of the British-Americans. Please take note of it and do what you consider proper and fit." Though this information was not challenged before the Commission, Justice Khosla chose not to attach any importance to it. One wonders why.

The sacred memory of revered national icons must not be allowed to be tarnished by conspiracy theorists. So, let's set aside our prejudices and invoke our national credo - Satyamev Jayate. Let's have the unadulterated truth, so that myths may be dispelled. A group of regular guys have mounted a campaign to make the best of a now-or-never opportunity. Because letting it pass could mean going along with the sin of leaving out in cold a man who fought for India.