You are here:  Home  >  Editorial  >  Current Article

Tutorial on backdated signatures

By   /  April 16, 2017  /  Comments Off on Tutorial on backdated signatures

    Print       Email

The list of allocations of the Chief Minister’s Road Development Fund that was first circulated in social media in the middle of March 2017 got the attention of all and sundry in the state because it indicated that the signature of the former chief minister was appended more than 2 weeks after his resignation from the chair. On enquiry by Eastern Mirror, the CMO it was clarified that that the date under Zeliang’s signature read “2” (February) in the slot indicating the month and not “3” (March). However, another conflicting clarification was received from the CMO with a list and signatures appended on a much earlier date. The date of signature in the new list that was released to the media had 23/1/2017 as the date under the signature of the then chief minister. It further clarified that  after the new chief minister took over, he had suggested changes and so the list had to be edited and so a meeting between the former and the current chief minister was held on March 8,  2017. Moreover it claimed that it was a clerical error that mentioned the earlier designation of the former chief minister and through oversight he also signed the document. It also did not explain why the former chief minister was required to sign the CMRD fund allocation list after he had stepped down. The very statement nullified the previous clarification from the CMO that the date under the signature of the former chief minister should be read as February and not March.  It was also quite arrogant and blatant coming from the highest elected public office in the state that also alludes to the proverbial ‘thousand lies needed to hide a lie’. It was only later through the allegations of the NPCC another detail surfaced that in the list signed on 8/3/17, the two of the contractor firms were owned by the relatives of the former chief minister. This again indicated that the changes to the list thought might have been suggested by the present chief minister as claimed it was more to the liking of the former chief minister. It is presumed to be a norm that signatures continue to be signed in the state on back dates in almost all the public offices. It has become another convenient way of aiding corruption in the state. It is another form of misrepresentation and is actually illegal but since it is used purely ‘for-the-benefit-and-welfare-of-the-people-to-avail-the-free-money-sent-by-GoI’ it is not considered so. Therefore backdated promotions, transfers, regularisations, notifications, submissions et al are reported to be becoming the norm in the state. What better can the citizens ask for when the highest elected office in the State runs a detailed tutorial on how to (not to) do backdated signatures.

    Print       Email

You might also like...

Sacrifice Too High

Read More →