The Chief Minister of Delhi, Arvind Kejriwal, has provided reasons such as the Rajya Sabha elections, Republic Day festivities, and the Enforcement Directorate’s (ED) lack of disclosure and response for his inability to attend the questioning session by the investigating agency in the excise policy case on Wednesday (3 January).

Kejriwal, in a correspondence to the assistant director of ED, revealed that the Election Commission of India has scheduled the Rajya Sabha elections for the National Capital Territory of Delhi. He further stated that the nomination process began on Wednesday and the voting is set to occur on 19 January.

The three Rajya Sabha seats assigned to the National Capital Territory of Delhi will have their current terms end on 27 January, it was announced. As the national convener of the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP), Kejriwal expressed that his attention was consumed by the lead-up to the elections.

“Being the Chief Minister of Delhi, I am also quite occupied in planning and preparations for several programmes and functions for the Republic Day…” he added.

According to Indian Express, he also expressed his willingness to answer any questionnaire if the ED required any information or documents that he holds.

The ED first summoned Kejriwal in October of the previous year, requiring his presence for an interrogation on 2 November. A subsequent summons was dispatched on 18 December, requesting his appearance for questioning on 21 December. The most recent summons required his attendance today.

This marked the third occasion where he questioned the legitimacy of the summons via a letter and avoided the interrogation. Kejriwal, referencing the two previous letters sent to the agency, expressed his worry over the lack of response received, deeming it a “matter of concern.”

“It is a matter of concern that despite my comprehensive response(s) bringing to your notice critical dimensions and legal objections involved in issuing summons to me to appear ‘in person’ in your purported exercise of powers under Section 50 of Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA), you have chosen not to respond,” he wrote.

In his earlier replies, Kejriwal had labeled the summons as “motivated”, claiming they were “given out of spiteful motives”. He further questioned the grounds of his summons, whether as a “witness or a suspect”, pertaining to the Delhi excise policy case.

Kejriwal noted in his previous response that the ‘Schedule’ and ‘As per Annexure enclosed’ sections of the summons were crossed out with a pen, leaving no explicit details about the specific information, materials, or documents needed from him. He further added that similar notices lacking specific details have been deemed illegal and dismissed by courts in the past.

In his reply on Wednesday, he stated that the ED’s lack of comment on these issues led him to conclude that there was an unnecessary level of secrecy being maintained, and that their actions appeared opaque and arbitrary in the current situation.

Kejriwal expressed his strong dedication to the rule of law, pledging to cooperate and assist with any lawful, fair, and expedient inquiries or investigations. However, he noted that the ED’s lack of response to his previous two letters confirmed his concerns about certain vested interests and malicious motives taking precedence over any objective, rational, or impartial investigation or inquiry.

He stated that he was aware of numerous instances in the past where the ED had provided comprehensive answers and responses to questions or “concerns held by an individual”. However, in his situation, he claimed that the ED “denied even recognising the receipt of the thorough submissions”.

“As a premier investigating agency of the country, the ‘non-disclosure’ and ‘non-response’ approach adopted by you cannot sustain the test of law, equity or justice. Your obstinacy (is) tantamount to assuming the role of judge, jury and executioner at the same time which is not acceptable in our country governed by the rule of law,” Kejriwal wrote.