Congress ticks off former law minister H R Bhardwaj, he hits back

NEW DELHI: Reminded That He Was Given 5 RS Terms, Ex-Mantri Says `Didn't Get It For Free' Former law minister H R Bhardwaj said his outburst against Congress was provoked by P Chidambaram's comment about "poor drafting" of the now-scrapped Section 66A of IT Act, adding he knew the former finance minister was trying to hit out at him.

A day after he slammed Congress chief Sonia Gandhi as well as the UPA dispensation for poor leadership, Bhardwaj said he had not made any public statement since coming back from Karnataka as governor and had quietly retired nine months ago, with no ties to Congress.

"But Chidambaram said poor drafting of Sec tion 66A had rendered it vulnerable to misuse. I know he was hinting at me as being responsible for it. I have no knowledge of this section, who did it," he told TOI, adding the said section must have been worked out by the communications and IT ministry.

Bhardwaj said, "If I am attacked, I defend myself with all the strength at my command."

The former law minister and Gandhi family loyalist stunned everyone with public criticism of Sonia, accusing her of not taking responsibility for UPA's controversial decisions and of being surrounded by a coterie of sycophants.

On Friday , Congress dis approved of his remarks, with spokesperson Rita Joshi saying Bhardwaj was a senior leader whom the party had given five Rajya Sabha terms besides ministerial and gubernatorial positions, and "he should not have made these statements at this stage".

Responding to the ticking off, Bhardwaj acknowl edged that he had "enjoyed the maximum" and was grateful to Congress and especially Indira Gandhi and Rajiv Gandhi. He said, "But I did not get it for free. I defended Indira Gandhi and Rajiv. They gave me Rajya Sabha and ministry as gift for my hard work and dedication. I was an advisor to Rajiv when he was AICC general secretary . He made me a minister."

He said but for the provocation after the Supreme Court's scrapping of the contentious Section 66A, he would not have spoken out."This is how they defend themselves, by calling it poor drafting. Just accept the court decision, it is for the freedom of speech which is inviolable," he argued.