When it comes to Subramanian Swamy, I say, don't ask

I remember meeting Subramanian Swamy, at the height of the 2G spectrum scam, in the dimly lit basement of his Nizamuddin East home, and coming out disoriented. But that brief spell gave me a crucial insight into his personality: Never ever ask him questions.

But right now there’s one question that begs for an answer: who spread the news that Subramanian Swamy would be the next JNU vice-chancellor?

A good first guess would be "sources" from the Union ministry of HRD. But why would the ministry spill out such a sensitive fact? With about 10 heads of top educational institutes "quitting" their posts in the last one year, one would have thought the HRD would be chary of the word "vice-chancellor".

Could it have been an over-imaginative journalist or a social media enthusiast? Not funny-ha-ha at all, more funny-sad. We all ran the risk of unleashing protesting JNU scholars on the streets of the capital. More than anything, that would have opened the nightmarish floodgates: of snarled traffic and snarling Delhiites.

Could it have come from some "person, who doesn’t know the law", says Union HRD minister Smriti Irani, now—Swamy being well past the age of eligibility for the post—dismissing the news? But that’s treading dangerous waters: because Swamy has already tweeted: "No formal offer nor will there be if the Government cannot meet my pre-conditions." Even now he is saying: "They had asked me informally."

Then, who is speaking the truth? Does Swamy have evidence to support his claims? Now, those who know him also know that’s the quintessential Catch-22 of being Swamy. Although this is the third claim of a plum offer this year—the other two being that Swamy was promised the portfolio of PM Modi’s finance minister and that he was also offered the top post of the BRICS Bank — you cannot ask him: "Do you have evidence to support your claims?"

I remember asking him that question on 2G and nearly had my head bitten off. The conversation went a bit like this:

How do you know all this? "That’s a funny question. So far, have I failed anywhere for lack of evidence? Then? Why are you asking that question?"

"I just wanted to know how you came to know of the division of 2G money?"

"Now that’s a very interesting question. Even if I showed you a document would you even understand? How would you know it’s not a forged document?"

"Would you still show us?"

"I won’t show you anything. Because, I know it’s useless. When the time comes for me to prove it in court I will show it."

In those days, the Harvard economist and (then) Janata Party chief was bringing out, what appeared to be, one damning document after another and putting the political high-and-mighty of nation in the dock. Both A Raja and Kanimozhi were in jail, Manmohan Singh was in the docks and Swamy was baying for Chidambaram’s prosecution.

"Wait till the end of 2012 and everybody will be convicted," he had told me, with calm confidence. "Nobody will escape." What exactly did he mean? "After Chidambaram I will go for Vadra, then, of course, Sonia. And then the business owners." He had all the evidence, thanks to "friends all over the world", who apparently came up to him and gave him those documents.

But 2012 came and went. And the Supreme Court gave clean chit to Manmohan Singh and dismissed Swamy’s petitions against Chidambaram: "In our opinion, no case is made out within the parameters indicated…no prima facie material." But that wouldn’t matter to someone like Swamy.

A master of eloquence and verbiage, Swamy also claimed that day that the blueprint of economic reforms, which Manmohan Singh is credited with, was actually his — formulated when he became Cabinet minister of commerce and law in 1990 under prime minister Chandra Shekhar, which was later carried out in 1991 by Manmohan Singh, finance minister under prime minister Narasimha Rao. "I am always a target," he had said with a smile, "because I am seen as a destabilising factor. They want to keep me down, they think I am uncontrollable. Most of the time in Indian politics people look for controllable people."

I had not made the mistake of asking him again: "evidence?" And I would use the word "maverick", according to its original dictionary meaning, to describe the man: nonconformist, unconventional, square peg in a round hole, eccentric, outlier, rebel, dissenter, bad boy. I know that he doesn’t like the word, because as he said, "In this country people think a maverick is a person who flits from this and that. But I don’t flit at all. I come to a conclusion, then I stick to it, even if I sink It doesn’t matter."

The jury might be out on that, with his shifting political allegiances in the last 30 years. But don’t ask. Just keep guessing.