AND THEY ALL FALL DOWN

By: Menaka Doshi, Corporate Editor, CNBC TV18

It's a strange Saturday morning. I rarely watch the news on weekends, my only reprieve, but for the past 2 hours I've surfed channels beaming breathless commentary as they await the trial court's verdict on Subramaniam Swamy's petition. Times Now had a timer counting down to 12.15pm, the appointed time according to them. But the Judge did not yield to Navika Kumar's schedule. NDTV 24/7 and CNN IBN bantered on endlessly. I empathise. It's not easy to host a live show when all you can do is fill time till the news arrives. Same faces, same comments, same rubbish speculation. Everyone apologetic about the guesswork and yet guessing on. I'm bored. And nervous and excited.
The explanation in reverse order - excited because finally there is an effort to hold politicians accountable. Nervous because I don't know if a negative verdict could eventually prompt general elections. Who would I vote for? I wonder. Not Modi's BJP. Not Raja's ally - Congress. Not BCCI's NCP (or is it the other way round?). Not Amma, Didi, Behenji or Madam. Who?
Bored because well, news television does that to me nowadays. (Yes, yes I know I shouldn't be saying that about an industry that employs me but what to do...the truth slips out sometimes!)
The morning weighs after a tiring week - I spent all of  Thursday night and Friday reading and analysing the Supreme Court verdict on 2G licenses. It's made me very sad. That 2 respected senior judges feel the need to push 'auction' as the only method to allocate natural resources. Our overwhelming mistrust of politicians and bureaucrats forces us to want to take away all discretion and mandate a fixed system that is more transparent but can be unviable and distorting in some cases and absolutely ill-suited in others. 10 years from now when water is a scarce commodity will we be forced to auction it? A colleague at work counters my example with another - what about education she says? Not a natural commodity, but scarce and a matter of public interest. Will seats in schools have to be auctioned some day?
Of course I know the judges didn't intend that in their order but their language conveys otherwise. 
'In other words, while transferring or alienating the natural resources, the State is duty bound to adopt the method of auction by giving wide publicity so that all eligible persons can participate in the process'
"A judgment is not a statute" grumbles senior Supreme Court advocate Anil Diwan, a panellist on a discussion show I record on Friday evening.
I know it isn't. And yet since there is no statute on the matter, what else is binding?
Another panellist, a young woman lawyer (we don't have enough in this country) is upset about the big leaps the judgement makes. From finding that the Minister (Raja) favoured and benefited a few real estate companies to penalising 9 companies. "The judgment says nothing about their culpability" Pratibha Jain exclaims. Use your imagination I tell her, knowing fully well that's not how judgments should work.
After all anybody with access to newspapers or TV in 2008 should have seen the dark, grey cloud hanging over the allocation of 2G licenses and spectrum. The Prime Minister and his Cabinet are excused for their ignorance because they don't read newspapers or watch news TV. Neither are they the interfering types to keep tabs on each other. So what if incumbent telecom players wrote letters to them - letters are read (and dismissed) by their secretaries.  So how were they to know what Raja was upto?
But surely global companies like Telenor had done their due diligence? Didn't they have swarms of suits poring over the credibility of the Indian companies they were about to invest in and their promoters. Hadn't the suits picked up on the whispers in the corridors of power - that the allocation process was rigged. (I'm not just saying it, the Supreme Court has found so)
Didn't the suits conduct a 'smell test' and warn their clients about the fish odour?
Despite all this if these foreign companies thought it fit to invest then it was a calculated risk. A bet that didn't pay off. To them I say you are not a 'victim in a riot' if you willingly walk into it.
Pratibha disagrees. She doesn't think good intent makes up for the gaps in the judgment. Other panellists talk about the legal options facing these foreign telecom investors. Sanjeev Aga looks tired. Battle weary. "I'm sick of show cause notices and penalties" he says. "We are upright citizens and upright businesses...and now our licenses have been cancelled."
"Maybe this is the beginning of a clean up" I venture. He smiles, dimly "Then this pain would have been worth it".
The show is over. Pratibha calls me an optimist. I respond by saying that after 4 years of critiquing law and policy for being poor in both intent and form, I'm happy to applaud a glass half full. Yet the sadness doesn't lift.
A newspaper column praises how the 2 Supreme Court judgments (Vodafone & 2G) are 'ringing endorsements of rule of law'. Is that what we have to prove to the world now? That we are a law abiding nation? And 2 judgments is all it takes? If the Supreme Court had ruled differently in both would we still not be a law abiding nation, that settles its disputes in court?
The clamour on TV rises two pitches. The verdict is finally out. Thursday's winner Subramaniam Swamy is undeterred by the loss on Saturday. "I will appeal to the High Court" he says "And then to the Supreme Court" he adds. "There is no place for disappointment in a battle against corruption" he says.
As we watch TV my mother asks if I have ever interviewed him. I say no, I stay away from politicians. Even the 'different' ones. Their naked hunger for power frightens me. Her eyebrow arches, as if to ask, are businessmen any different?
I leave the room and move to the Mumbai Mirror. Page 8 - 'Gautam Singhania faces trial for cutting 586 trees'. I tweet - In India sometimes businessmen make even politicians look good.
Doubt the bird or tree lobbies in India can afford Harish Salve. The views of the author must not be confused as those of the show, channel, company or group. They are personal.