An exemplar politician bar one

THIRUVANANTHAPURAM: The bar bribery case, which is still an open case, remains the major blot on K M Mani’s otherwise illustrious political career.

The case that led to even his resignation from the Oommen Chandy-led cabinet in 2015, even culminated in his party’s exit from the UDF in 2016, after 36 years of association. The case, which was picked up by the LDF as one of its main campaign theme in the 2016 assembly elections, erupted on November 1, 2014 when the then bar hotel association working president Biju Ramesh raised the allegation that Mani, who was the then finance minister, was paid Rs 1 crore for reopening 418 bar hotels that had to be shut down following a Supreme Court order.

Though it would have been dealt politically, the allegations took a serious turn when the vigilance and anti-corruption bureau registered an FIR against him. The agency even interrogated Mani and recorded his statements and the opposition vied for not just his blood but the whole of the UDF government.

The budget presentation of 2015 witnessed incidents that was never seen before in the history of the state legislative assembly. The opposition MLAs, while trying to stop Mani from presenting the budget, created unruly incidents inside the assembly to the extent of destroying the assembly hall that came to the notice of the whole world and brought perpetual shame to the assembly, considered as one of the role models for all other states.

After the forensic examination of voice samples, polygraph test and recording of statement before a magistrate, even the vigilance was divided over the findings in the case. While the investigating team was seemingly influenced by the public outcry against Mani and gave a report that he should be prosecuted, agency’s top brass said there were no evidences enough to prosecute him.

The agency later gave a closure report before the vigilance court. But the court refused to accept the report and asked the agency to submit the case diary. Later in August 2016, the court directed the vigilance to continue probe against Mani.

Even though the agency has filed a closure report thrice before the court as no clear evidence could be gathered against Mani, the court refused to accept the report and the case remains pending before the agency.