This article discusses concerns around unchecked executive power under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), and the growing trend of selective enforcement against political opponents. It examines the structural tensions between central agencies and state governments, and calls for a reassertion of constitutional balance.
The Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA) originally drafted to preserve the financial integrity and security of the nation. It was supposed to be our shield. Instead, it is being the Narayanstra of the Central Government empowered by PMLA, a divine weapon that launches unrelenting barrages until the enemy, typically a political opponent, surrenders. And once they submit? Silence.
Armed with Section 3 and 17 of Prevention of Money Laundering Act, the Enforcement Directorate (ED) has the ultimate power to enter, break open, seize anything, or examine any person. all because it has a ‘reason to believe’.
Not faith in the Constitution, not evidence before a magistrate, but the self-affirming belief of an empowered bureaucrat. No First Information Report (FIR) is needed. No judicial oversight. No accountability. Not even an explanation. Just raw belief. In the Gospel of PMLA, belief is evidence, and due process is heresy.
India’s sensational cocktail is no more brewed with tequila or whiskey. It is with 30 ml of central power and 30ml of legal ambiguity shaking the federalism.
The recent raid by the ED against its opposition DMK government run institution is the showcase of its absolute power. The raid on TASMAC, a unique government run monopoly institution earning more than Rs. 45,000 crores annually from alcohol.
In the same country, where alcohol is considered sin and bad, governments are earning thousands of crores while lecturing for prohibition of liquor.
The Enforcement Directorate accuses the government department with money laundering and benami transactions citing FIRs by the state Anti-Corruption and Vigilance department since 2014 alleging Rs. 1,000 crores.
These dusty documents were preserved with more care than archival court judgments, only to be popped open right before a general election. Upcoming elections are just a coincidence. Nothing more.
Just like more than 98% of the ED’s cases are against the opposition political leaders is just another co incidence. An accident. A statistical anomaly. A divine alignment of stars. Or maybe just whiskey-filtered governance.
The ED alleged that TASMAC employees were collecting amounts higher than the Maximum Retail Price (MRP) and sharing it with higher-ups in exchange for bribes. Based on this, a marathon 60-hour ED interrogation was uncorked starting March 6 a stretch that would make even a TASMAC loyalist collapse.
Accordingly, Writ Petitions were filed by the government before Madras High Court with prayer for declaration that raid by ED was illegal and violative of federal structure of the constitution.
The High Court sipped their ‘reason of belief’ and dismissed the petition. As a result of which government preferred an appeal before the Supreme Court.
The ED is sensibly considered as the superior investigating agency of this country equipped with unlimited power, even a government must bow for its ‘reason to believe’.
The ED though bashed by the Supreme Court ‘as exceeding all limits’ through an interim stay has not yet achieved what it had started.
A stay might have saved the federalism as of now, but what about the threat made?
Unlike a regular FIR which is easily accessible online, ED has Enforcement Case Information Report, where the accused will not be given a copy whatsoever. It is invisible and unseeable. Maybe PMLA accused must hire astrologers to divine the contents of the ECIR.
The ED had two legal options either to knock the door using Section 54(j) of PMLA Act seeking assistance from Tamil Nadu Government or to burn the door with Section 17 of PMLA Act.
The Tamil Nadu Government unfortunately at the wrong side of the national governance had to burn before the majestic power of ED.
It is not just a majestic figure wielding power, but a diplomatically cloaked juggernaut with the powers at par the Civil Court in trying a suit by Section 50 of PMLA. It can collect evidence, summon anyone, examine witness under oath. Even the Chief Minister of a state is no exception to this.
The so called ‘Innocent until proven guilty’ has no room to play here. ED’s summon itself is a punitive action, where one must prove innocence just to get bail. (Section 45 of PMLA Act) Before conviction, before cross examination, even before trial.
We proudly call ourselves a Union of States. We enjoy being called as quasi federal system. But how federal is our federalism?
The State Government may sue the Central Government before the Supreme Court of India under Article 131, but which article allows the weaponization of investigation?
ED is not just a political hot dog, but it is suited with quasi-judicial robes with unlimited powers constitutionally unsupervised and politically convenient.
When a state earns from liquor; the ruling party allegedly launders it and the central government is investigating through ED. Who exactly is sober here?
If every opposition state run is now a potential crime scene, would it target Reserve Bank too, they too print money.
TASMAC may sell liquor, but Indian democracy should not walk tipsy.
We, the People of India, deserves Constitutional Sobriety..!
Subscribe to Our Newsletter
Get the latest CounterCurrents updates delivered straight to your inbox.
M. Aswin Rome Pon Saravanan BBA LLB (Hons.) BBL DCA DYHE is a practising advocate from Tirunelveli District Tamil Nadu
