UDF Govt Pleader Appointments Mired in Bribery Allegations, Coalition Partners Cry Foul

Thiruvananthapuram: Government pleader appointments made since the UDF came to power have been embroiled in allegations of bribery running into lakhs of rupees, with Congress and Muslim League lawyer organisations publicly voicing their protest against appointments being made at the personal discretion of Chief Minister and Law Minister V D Satheesan.

The primary grievance is that coalition partners have been denied their rightful share of the postings. There is also strong objection to a Jamaat-e-Islami-affiliated lawyer being granted a pleader position at the expense of the League. Complainants allege that anywhere between ₹10 lakh and ₹15 lakh was demanded in exchange for appointments to the posts of Special Government Pleader, Senior Government Pleader, and Pleader.

Lawyers Congress state president P K Abdurrahman has filed complaints with KPCC president and AICC General Secretary K C Venugopal, alleging that the panel of names submitted by both the Lawyers Congress and the League's Lawyers Forum were bypassed in favour of individuals with no organisational affiliations, BJP sympathisers, and candidates deemed unfit or unqualified.

Discontent has also surfaced over the appointment of a lawyer who has not practised for more than ten years and the wife of a Youth Congress state secretary — both named as pleaders in apparent violation of the eligibility criteria requiring seven years of general practice and three years of High Court practice. A lawyer who serves as Central Government Standing Counsel and is known to be close to BJP leader V Muraleedharan was also initially considered, but was dropped after objections were raised. Complaints further allege that the Chief Minister did not consult alliance partners before the State Attorney appointment either. Amid the continuing dispute, only 80 of the 140 vacant posts have been filled so far.

The Muslim League, which had expected 40 pleader positions, received only nine — and two of those appointees have no affiliation with the League. A lawyer from MP Adv. Harris Beeran's office and a junior of Additional Advocate General Muhammad Shah were counted against the League's quota, despite having no connection to either the League or its Lawyers Forum. Adding to the League's grievance is the separate claim staked by Jamaat-e-Islami over the appointments.