It's time the BJP asked Vaiko to leave the NDA

Back then: Vaiko (centre) with Pottu Amman and Prabhakaran

The timing could not have been more off the mark. When the nation was observing the sixth anniversary of the Mumbai terror attacks, some political leaders in Tamil Nadu were celebrating the 60th birth anniversary of Velupillai Prabhakaran.
For those who cannot recall the name, Prabhakaran was the chief of the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE), which was responsible for the assassinations of former Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi in 1991 and Sri Lankan President Ranasinghe Premadasa in 1993. It was also behind the deaths of many more government officials and ordinary people caught in the crossfire of its war with the Sri Lankan government. Since 1992, the LTTE has been designated a terror organisation by India and this makes MDMK leader Vaiko’s support to the group and its leader almost treasonous.
Vaiko has often boasted about the rapport he shared with a terrorist like Prabhakaran. It is also not the first time he has openly expressed support to the LTTE and a separate Tamil Eelam in Sri Lanka. This chest-thumping, by the likes of Vaiko and other fringe leaders, can be dismissed as nothing else but an attempt to remain relevant in Tamil Nadu politics.
But his party is an ally of the ruling coalition at the Centre. To celebrate the birthday of a terrorist who assassinated a former prime minister is beyond the pale and should be condemned by all political parties. In fact, the BJP should review its ties with the MDMK. It may be in Vaiko’s interest to keep the Tamil Eelam issue on the boil, but the major political parties in the state have, by their silence, shown themselves to be somewhat spineless and prisoners of votebank politics.
Vaiko’s antics are anti-national and political parties should have called a spade a spade. Vaiko has every right to celebrate whatever he wants in his private space. But to make common cause with a terror organisation is unacceptable and the sooner he is told that the better. And in fact, the government of the day should act against this anti-national activity on his part.

Jaya should not encourage Tamil Nadu's 'suicide frenzy'

AIADMk followers crying outside the party office, Chennai (IBNLive photo)

Taking one’s own life because of the misfortune suffered by a political leader or a public personage is nothing new in Tamil Nadu, or even Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka. So it came as no surprise when, according to the AIADMK, 193 people committed suicide on hearing of then Tamil Nadu chief minister J Jayalalithaa’s brief incarceration in a Rs. 66-crore disproportionate assets case. But in what seems like a gesture condoning these deaths, the AIADMK leader has announced a cash relief of Rs. 3 lakh to the families of those who died. It does not end here. She also announced a payment of Rs. 50,000 to the three who tried to commit suicide. Attempted suicide is a criminal offence under Section 309 of the Indian Penal Code and so in effect Jayalalithaa is supporting a criminal act. To be rewarded for showing such ‘devotion’ to a leader will only encourage this pernicious trend.
When former TN chief minister MG Ramachandran died in 1987, around 30 of his followers were alleged to have committed suicide. When Kannada actor Rajkumar died in 2006 there were rumours that many of his followers had taken their lives. When the then Andhra Pradesh CM YSR Reddy died in a helicopter crash in 2009, there were reports that more than 100 people died of ‘shock’. In a sub-culture where the popularity of a leader is measured by the vandalism his/her followers indulge in or by the number of followers who either hurt themselves or commit suicide when their leader suffers a setback or has died, the AIADMK’s gesture may seem perfectly rational to the faithful. The move appears to be an attempt by Jayalalithaa to exploit the sentiments of the people. More dangerously, her ‘generosity’ comes across as a reminder to her followers that mindless devotion will be compensated.
Jayalalithaa is a popular leader who enjoys enormous support in Tamil Nadu. As a progressive leader, she should have no truck with this practice and should take steps to end this trend. She is an able administrator and has done commendable work for the disadvantaged. But this is a blot on her copybook which she must erase without delay.

Jayalalithaa in jail: Panneerselvam should now work for Tamil Nadu

For her emotionally overwrought followers, this is the worst possible news. On Tuesday the Karnataka High Court rejected AIADMK leader and former Tamil Nadu CM J Jayalalithaa’s bail plea in connection to a `66.65 crore disproportionate assets case. In the past 10 days that Jayalalithaa has been in jail Tamil Nadu has witnessed the most sycophantic outpourings of love for her. The AIADMK cadre has held protests — from hunger strikes to ‘Mannu Soru’ (eating food from the ground) to human chains — have disrupted public life and even destroyed public property. The fact that the court has come to its conclusion after having examined all the evidence seems lost on Amma’s followers. Tamil Nadu is no stranger to over-the-top displays of love and admiration for its leaders. In 1987, when then CM MG Ramachandran died, around 30 people committed suicide. But the current protests are not going to produce any favourable result as the court is not going to take notice of the antics of the followers. The protesters who are demanding her release and saying that the case is politically motivated are doing a singular disservice to the judiciary, which has acted without fear or favour.

Jayalalithaa (left), Sasikala and O Panneerselvam (File Frontline photo)

Even if we were to pass off the people’s protests as ‘spontaneous’ reactions of affection for Amma, there is no excuse for the way the state government is handling the situation. Chief Minister O Panneerselvam, after taking office, has done precious little to bring any semblance of normalcy to the state. While he is in Chennai many of his Cabinet colleagues are in Bangalore. An elected government has a duty to discharge its duties, not be in mourning for a leader who has been found guilty of corruption.  The state machinery is being subtly used to provoke reactions — like the move by a group of educational institutions to remain closed on Tuesday to show solidarity with Amma. Reacting to a PIL, the Madras High Court ordered that all schools and colleges must remain open, a damning indictment of the administration’s failure. Posters threatening to hold Kannadigas hostage if Amma is not released show how the police’s soft approach to protests has encouraged these people. That these posters had the names of various AIADMK leaders will only egg these protestors on.
There are pressing concerns that the state administration has to address — like the looming power crisis. If Mr Panneerselvam and the AIADMK are not able to run the government without its leader, maybe they should approach the governor, because the state cannot come to a standstill just because its leaders are overcome by emotion.

Jayalalithaa in jail: How does this change politics in Tamil Nadu

It has stretched for 18 long years. It has been tried in two states. And now, the long arm of the law has closed in on AIADMK supremo J Jayalalithaa. She has been convicted in the long-pending  disproportionate assets case, sentenced for four years and fined a staggering `100 crore. The special court in Bangalore also convicted Jayalalithaa’s close aide Sasikala Natarajan, her niece Illavarasi and her nephew and Jayalalithaa’s disowned foster son Sudhakaran. With the conviction, Amma, as her supporters call her, becomes the first chief minister to be convicted under the Prevention of Corruption Act. She may be out of the electoral reckoning for a good long time, though she has been known to roar back on many an occasion.  
How will this verdict change — if at all it does — the political landscape of Tamil Nadu? Her party, the AIADMK, will surely take a beating and this is a shot in the arm for rival political parties. But this does not mean that there will be a political vacuum in the state. It will take some deft footwork by both regional and national parties to cash in on last week’s conviction. However, none seem to have their house in order in the state. Though the DMK has moved past the sibling rivalry phase that at one point seemed to hobble the  party, it is yet to recover from the drubbing it received in the Lok Sabha elections. The BJP and the Congress are yet to find their feet in Dravidian politics. DMDK chief Vijayakanth will benefit to an extent but it remains to be seen if he can convert that advantage into seats in the assembly. The DMK stands to gain the most but it has many hurdles to overcome.
Finance minister O Panneerselvam who replaces Jayalalithaa as chief minister can be expected to continue Amma’s policies and, in all likelihood, take dictation from Poes Garden. In 2001, when she had to step down, it was O Panneerselvam again who was appointed Tamil Nadu chief minister. There is no second-rung leadership in the party, it is Amma all the way. In the short-run, this will help her, but it could weaken the party in the long-run. But the conviction sends out a clear message: No one is above the law, not even the Empress of Poes Garden who has in recent times seemed invincible.

A 'Modi Wave' and the Muslim vote could stop Jayalalithaa's Delhi dreams

In Tamil Nadu, religion has seldom been a poll issue. Caste-based issues, regional and linguistic hegemony (the anti-Hindi agitations), the Lankan Tamil issue, water-sharing disputes (be it the Cauvery River problem with Karnataka or the Mullaiperiyar Dam row with Kerala), have dominated the Tamil Nadu political-scape for decades now. Another reason is the dominance of Dravidian parties, which in principle aim for social reforms through ending religious beliefs.
However, in this election things have changed with the BJP forming a five-party alliance in the state. Though in the past the BJP has contested from various seats in Tamil Nadu, it is for the first time that the national party has headed an alliance in the state. The NDA along with the Congress and AAP — both the parties are fighting the election alone in the state — has made the contest multi-cornered in many of the 39 seats in Tamil Nadu.

J Jayalalithaa with Narendra Modi (File photo)

The telling presence of the BJP in the state has made religion an important poll issue. The NDA has given the BJP a presence in the state like never before. There is a palpable ‘Modi Wave’ in the state. It is not clear if this ‘wave’ will help the BJP win a number of seats but it is likely to adversely affect the AIADMK in mainly two ways. First, traditionally, the upper caste Hindu votes have gone to the AIADMK. With the BJP in the poll scene, these votes are likely to split.
Second, it is likely that many of the voters apprehensive of the BJP and its prime ministerial candidate Narendra Modi have voted against the AIADMK, fearing that the party will support the BJP at the Centre in a post-poll alliance.
A BJP campaign, led by Modi, has brought into focus the Muslim community. There are about 4.5 million Muslims in the state or 6% of the state population. In an election where the margins are slender, 6% cannot be ignored. This has seen many regional parties wooing the community.
However, the disillusionment among the Muslims, especially the youth, with many regional parties is an important issue. “The bulk of Muslims have been with the DMK since the 1960s. But, the younger lot of Muslims are increasingly moving towards the Tamil Nadu Muslim Munnetra Kazagham and Tamil Nadu Tauheed Jamaat,” says S Anwar, a film-maker who has documented the history of ‘Muslims of Madras from 1600 to 2000 CE’ for the Madras Gazetteer Project. The inability to win the confidence of this section will prove crucial for the parties.

KM Khader Mohideen, president of the Tamil Nadu State
Indian Union Muslim League with DMK chief M Karunanidhi
(File photo by The Hindu)

The Muslims are unlikely to turn towards the Congress because of an anti-incumbency wave and it does not have a commanding presence in the state. AAP would like to believe its stand against corruption and the fact that a sizeable number of its 434 candidates all over India are Muslims may act in its favour. But AAP has failed to create a buzz in Tamil Nadu.
In such a scenario, it is the DMK, AIADMK’s arch-rival, which will benefit. The corruption charges against some of its leaders and the Alagiri-Stalin sibling rivalry is not likely to have an impact. Also, its vote base remains largely intact.
Though the AIADMK was leading in opinion polls initially, towards the final days before polling, the DMK witnessed a surge in its favour. A similar pattern was witnessed in 2009 — the AIADMK was expected to win a large number of seats but the DMK alliance surprised pollsters by winning 27 seats. In 16 days it will be clear how much of an impact the BJP-led alliance has made in Tamil Nadu. It will be clear how the Muslims has responded to the ‘Modi Wave’, and, most importantly, how these developments have affected J Jayalalithaa’s ambitions of playing a crucial role in government formation at the Centre.
(This appeared in the Hindustan Times on April 30, 2014)

Is there a NaMo wave south of the Vindhyas?

Till now the BJP has not been able to make considerable gains south of the Vindhyas, except in Karnataka. In 2009, from the four southern states of Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka, Tamil Nadu and Kerala, which together have 129 Lok Sabha seats, the BJP won only 19 seats, all from Karnataka. The BJP-led NDA marked its presence in 1999 in other southern states through regional parties like the DMK in Tamil Nadu and the TDP in Andhra Pradesh. The South has been a blind spot for the party for quite some time but this time round, the BJP is focusing extensively on these states and hopes to do much better. BJP president Rajnath Singh has said that the party’s performance in Tamil Nadu will surprise poll pundits and some senior leaders even claim that the BJP will win 50 seats from the South alone. Many top BJP leaders, including its prime ministerial candidate, Narendra Modi, and senior leaders like LK Advani have toured the South to boost the party’s electoral prospects.

In Karnataka, the return of BS Yeddyurappa and B Sriramulu to the BJP fold is a shot in the arm for the party, which lost the 2013 assembly election to the Congress. The BJP hopes to win more than half of the 28 Lok Sabha seats in the state. In Tamil Nadu, where the BJP has got into an alliance with five regional parties, the saffron party might upset the poll equation. The AIADMK, with which, it is likely to enter into a post-poll alliance, is expected to win a majority of the 39 seats in the state. However, the BJP may eat into the AIADMK’s upper caste vote share and this will help the DMK. In Kerala, the BJP has an outside chance of winning in Thiruvananthapuram and Kasargod. In Andhra Pradesh, the BJP has pinned its hopes on N Chandrababu Naidu’s TDP. There is anger against the Congress for its mishandling of the bifurcation of the state and that might help the BJP-TDP alliance.
The BJP has big expectations from these four states. There is a ‘Modi Wave’ in the South, where many people are aware of the Gujarat chief minister and his development agenda. This might increase the BJP’s vote share but it is to be seen if this will result in an increase in the number of seats the party will win. However, for a party that has not seen an active presence in the South, this is in itself an achievement.

NDA in TN: Captain to give Modi the Dravidian push

L to R: Vaiko, Vijayakanth, Rajnath Singh, Anbumani Ramadoss

Creating a “new political history” in Tamil Nadu as BJP president Rajnath Singh put it last Thursday while unveiling a new NDA coalition might be to overstate the case. But nevertheless, it is a significant achievement for the saffron party. Unable to reach a pre-poll alliance with its erstwhile ally, the AIADMK — notwithstanding the bonhomie between chief minister J Jayalalithaa and the BJP’s PM candidate, Narendra Modi — the BJP has brought together five regional parties on the same platform. What the BJP has achieved through this coalition is unique and commendable. It is unique because for more than four decades Tamil Nadu has seen bipolar politics between the main two Dravidian parties — the DMK and the AIADMK. Other parties, including the Congress, have been relegated to the margins. The NDA alliance in Tamil Nadu — including Vijayakanth’s DMDK, Vaiko’s MDMK and Ramadoss’ PMK — has the potential to challenge this two-party dominance. This is commendable because the BJP has virtually no presence in the state. In 2009, the BJP did not get a single one of the 39 seats and today it is spearheading the third political option in the state. Compare this to the Congress, which in 2009 won eight seats while in an alliance with the DMK, but today finds itself alone with no alliance partner.
That said, the BJP’s alliance comes with many built-in limitations. In the event of the BJP requiring the support of either the AIADMK or the DMK to form a government at the Centre and given the bitter differences among  the regional parties, it is to be seen how a Vijayakanth-led DMDK and a Jayalalithaa-led AIADMK can be accommodated on the same side. A contradiction in this coalition is the coming together of the DMDK and the PMK as both parties have been at loggerheads. The absence of PMK founder S Ramadoss from Thursday’s function has also created a lot of speculation. But, to quote Otto von Bismarck, “Politics is the art of the possible…” and in the past we have seen unexpected twists and turns during government formations.
A lot can happen between now and April 24 when the state goes to polls and even after the results are announced on May 16.  Nevertheless, it would be safe to say that the BJP has made the right moves by extending its alliance in the South and thereby getting closer to its target ‘Mission 272+’. These developments, if nothing else, will impart the colour and dynamism that will make elections in the state all the more interesting.

From death to life: Supreme Court does it right, AIADMK politicises it

The right to life is sacrosanct. This is the message from the Supreme Court which on Tuesday commuted the death sentence of three convicts — Santhan, Murugan and Perarivalan — in the Rajiv Gandhi assassination case. The court rightly stated that an “inordinate and unreasonable” delay in the disposal of the mercy petitions of the convicts rendered the “process of execution of death sentence arbitrary, whimsical and capricious and, therefore, inexecutable”. The verdict is also proof that the judiciary’s outlook is in keeping with the international call for doing away with the death sentence or awarding it only in the ‘rarest of rare cases’ where there is irrefutable evidence.
After the Tamil Nadu governor had rejected the trio’s mercy petitions in April 2000, the ministry of home affairs submitted the mercy petitions for the President’s consideration in July 2005 — after a delay of more than five years. Finally, in September 2011 the President rejected their mercy petitions but by then the convicts had waited for agonising 11 long years. The apex court’s observation that a “mercy plea can be decided at much faster speed than what is being done now” is spot on and has been proved by the Centre, as in the hanging to death of Afzal Guru. Guru was convicted for the 2001 Parliament attack and in 2002 he was sentenced to death. In February 9, 2013, six days after the President rejected his mercy plea, Guru was hanged to death in a stealthy manner. Here all the systems came in to place and a decision was taken within a ‘reasonable time’.

While the apex court’s decision to commute the death sentence of the three to life is understandable, the Tamil Nadu government’s decision to seek the release all the seven convicts in the case is questionable. The AIADMK government, in its hurry to score a political point over its rivals, should not overlook the gravity of the crime. These seven people have been convicted for murder — in this case no less than the assassination of a former prime minister. Political parties should refrain from trying to make capital out of this issue to reap benefits in an election year. This sends a wrong signal and obscures the laudable objective of setting aside the death penalty.

Sibling rivalry in the DMK opens up the political space in Tamil Nadu

M Karunanidhi (left) with MK Stalin

DMK leader M Karunanidhi is a troubled man these days. His party is not in power in the state and nor is it in alliance with the UPA government at the Centre — but that is the least of his concerns now. On Friday, one of the DMK leader’s sons, MK Alagiri, was suspended from the party for anti-party activities. That this came after Alagiri’s younger brother, MK Stalin, was appointed to lead the party was not lost to anyone who knew about the bitter sibling rivalry.
All this has been accompanied by the sound-and-light show that Indian politics promises the people — Karunanidhi accused Alagiri of saying that Stalin will die in three or four months; Alagiri denied it; Stalin took it in stride; Stalin supporters burnt Alagiri in effigy and a section of the party nominated Stalin’s name for the Madurai Lok Sabha seat (at present Alagiri is the MP from Madurai). It is surprising that for all his political sagacity, Karunanidhi, at the autumn of his political career, could not see this coming and planned a better transition of power.

MK Alagiri

The crisis of this sort is detrimental to any political organisation and it couldn’t have come at a worse time for the DMK. The party was just about recovering from the electoral drubbing it got at the 2011 assembly elections — of the 234 seats in the state assembly the DMK managed a paltry 23 — and it was cobbling together an alliance for the general elections.
The DMK is no stranger to dissent. In 1972, MG Ramachandran broke away from the party to from the AIADMK. In 1994, Karunanidhi’s then trusted lieutenant Vai Gopalswamy (Vaiko) was expelled from the party. The relationship between the two soured when Stalin and Alagiri were given preference over Vaiko.
For more than four decades Tamil Nadu has had either a DMK or an AIADMK government. This two-party dominance has given little room for other parties to grow and the many that have sprouted out during this time have remained on the fringes or faded out. However, if the Alagiri-Stalin tiff were to hamper or even split the DMK, it could lead to a vacuum in the political space, altering the present balance. If such a scenario arises, the biggest gainer, for the moment, is actor-politician Vijayakanth’s DMDK which got 7.9% of the votes in the 2011 assembly polls. The Congress, Left parties and the PMK are other probable gainers.
Though Karunanidhi, last December, declared that the DMK would not ally with the Congress in the coming elections, the possibility of a post-poll alliance with either the Congress or even the BJP cannot be ruled out. However, the present crisis will hamper the chances of the Dravidian party to net a sizable number of seats to be wooed by either of the national parties or even for a third front. This uncertainty makes politics interesting in the state.
(This appeared in the Hindustan Times on January 30)

Bangladesh polls: Sheikh Hasina’s Pyrrhic victory

Khaleda Zia (L) and Sheikh Hasina

One need not be a psephologist to have predicted the poll outcome in Bangladesh’s parliamentary election held on Sunday. With the main opposition party, Khaleda Zia’s Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP), boycotting the election, it was a foregone conclusion that Sheikh Hasina’s Awami League would win a second term. However, even after bagging more than 230 seats among the 300 in the Jatiyo Shongshod (parliament), it might not be smooth sailing for Ms Hasina. Sunday’s election saw widespread poll-related violence, including the death of 18 people. And with just 22% polling (down from 87% last time) there are concerns about the validity of the process.
History will be at the back of Ms Hasina’s mind when she holds talks with the opposition on future polls. In February 1996, the BNP won a landslide victory after the Awami League boycotted the election. Following massive protests from the Opposition, fresh elections were held in June, in which the Awami League won. For the time being, however, Sheikh Hasina and her party have emerged victorious and this is good news for India — under her rule Dhaka-New Delhi ties have strengthened, especially in boosting trade and tackling terrorism. Early in 2013 Bangladesh had replaced Sri Lanka as India’s largest trading partner in the subcontinent. With trade close to $5 billion Bangladesh is an important trading partner for India.

After the general elections this summer, whichever party that forms the government in New Delhi should focus on strengthening ties with Dhaka. Rather than giving too much importance to smoothening ties with Islamabad, with no light at the end of that tunnel, New Delhi should focus on its neighbour on the east. Also, the equation is not gung with Colombo after frequent arrests of fishermen from Tamil Nadu and the picture is not yet clear with a change of government in the Maldives. The Centre should reach an agreement on water-sharing from Teesta River with Bangladesh. This would also go a long way in boosting the image of the Hasina government, which is often criticised by the Opposition for going the extra mile for India when the goodwill has not been reciprocated. Good ties with Dhaka will also help in tackling insurgency and boosting the economy in the Northeast.

Free the babus from the shackles of politicians

In what is a giant stride towards freeing the bureaucracy from the shackles of the political establishment, the Supreme Court on Thursday passed a judgment asking the Centre and state governments to ensure that civil servants have a fixed tenure. In order to look into this the court has suggested the setting up of an independent civil servants boards (CSB) within three months that would recommend to the government on matters relating to disciplinary actions, transfers and postings of civil servants. Acting on a two-year-old PIL filed by a group of retired bureaucrats, the apex court’s judgment requires that the Centre and states pass supporting legislation. The court was particularly critical of the political establishment in observing that civil servants had no stability in their tenure and were at times being transferred at the “whims and fancies of the executive head for political and other considerations and not in public interest”. The court has asked bureaucrats to put in writing the oral orders given by their superiors. The observation that a fixed tenure would “promote professionalism, efficiency and good governance” highlights the present plight bureaucrats face because of political interference.
Seen in the light of the recent events which highlighted the case of IAS officer Ashok Khemka, who was transferred while investigating the land deals in Haryana of Robert Vadra, the son-in-law of Congress president Sonia Gandhi, or the case of Durga Shakti Nagpal, who was suspended and later reinstated for taking on the sand mafia in Uttar Pradesh, an independent CSB will put a check on arbitrary transfers and suspensions. That Mr Khemka and Ms Nagpal are not one off cases adds more urgency for a politically independent body like the CSB. Others who faced the political heat are: C Umashankar, the IAS officer who took on the Marans in Tamil Nadu; Ashish Kumar, who took on the sand mafia in Tuticorin; Manoje Nath, for taking on corruption in Bihar; Sanjeev Bhat, EAS Sarma ...it is a long list. While the BJP has welcomed the judgment, the UPA government has criticised it and understandably so. Many feel that the court order is unworkable and is seen as yet another instance where the judiciary and political establishment will be at loggerheads. The government’s claim that it has been working towards bringing more transparency through its draft ‘Civil Services Performance, Standards and Accountability Bill, 2010’ is a bit late in the day and cannot but be seen as a poor effort to counter the CSB.

The euphoria over the judgment will be short-lived if it goes the way earlier administrative reform suggestions have gone. The Centre’s push for a fixed tenure for civil servants in 2007 saw just four states agreeing to it—interestingly Haryana was one of the states. The second Administrative Reforms Commission 2012 also suggested the need for a fixed tenure for civil servants. Recommendations by the PC Hota Committee and the Fifth Pay Commission for civil service boards have not been taken up by the government. The 2006 directive of the apex court calling in for sweeping police reforms to make the force more professional and free from political interference is gathering dust.

Banning menace: Reason for Bollywood to cheer

 

In February, information and broadcasting minister Manish Tewari tweeted: ‘Committee on Cinematographic framework (will) give latitude to review every aspect of certification process holistically & ensure integrity’ and the Justice Mukul Mudgal Committee has used that latitude to come up with a progressive model Cinematograph Bill to replace the Cinematograph Act 1952. The I&B ministry setup the Mudgal panel after the Jayalalithaa-led AIADMK government in Tamil Nadu banned Vishwaroopam. This was not a one-off case. While Prakash Jha’s 2011 film Aarakshan was banned in Uttar Pradesh, Punjab and Andhra Pradesh, Ashutosh Gowariker’s Jodha Akbar was banned in Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan and UP. Other films include Parzania, Firaaq that won two national awards, Madras Cafe, Bandit Queen... the list is endless. Done to not ‘hurt’ the sentiments of a particular section in society, such arbitrary bans have not only hampered artistic freedom but has also emboldened keening fringe groups to have their five minutes of glory by raising frivolous excuses to stall the screening of a film. It should be noted that these films run into troubled waters even after getting the go ahead from the censor board, thus rendering such vetting processes meaningless.

In the wake of such issues, the suggestions put forward by the Mudgal committee are noteworthy. The committee’s suggestion that the selection to the advisory panels of the Centre Board of Film Certification be more professional, consisting of members who are skilled, is spot on. The present practise of political appointments, often with people who have no inkling of the job required, is detrimental. Another suggestion is to increase the mandate of the Film Certification Appellate Tribunal (FCAT) to hear cases regarding an objection to any particular film, rather than a plaintiff approaching court as it happens at present. The suggestion to have more categories for classification of films and to bring age-specific divisions is a step in the right direction. The committee has also suggested that in cases where a state uses law and order as a reason to ban a film, ascendency must be given to the powers of the Cinematograph Act. Law and order being a State subject, this suggestion is likely to run into rough weather — and that would be unfortunate.
While the Mudgal committee has come up with astute insights, it is still a long way before these are implemented. There are many stumbling blocks in the way that might force this report to end up in the dusty pile of unimplemented reports submitted by various other government-appointed committees in the past. The Mudgal committee has done its job. Now, it is up to the government, both at the Centre and states, to see that it is implemented without much delay.

Kachchatheevu: A no man's land everyone wants

Kachchatheevu, an uninhabited island, a little over a square kilometre in area, has been a bone of contention between Tamil Nadu and Sri Lanka for decades. The Rajya Sabha on Monday saw MPs from Tamil Nadu criticising the Centre for its affidavit to the Supreme Court, which stated that no portion of India’s land was ceded to Sri Lanka. The Centre was responding to a petition by Tamil Nadu chief minister J Jayalalithaa, filed in 2008, seeking the apex court to declare unconstitutional the 1974 agreement. Tension over the island came to focus in 1974 after the Centre signed an agreement with Sri Lanka accepting that Kachchatheevu was not a part of India. According to the agreement signed between the two countries, fishermen from both sides can use the island to dry their nets and even pray at the St Antony’s shrine in the island. Politicians, across the political spectrum in Tamil Nadu, claim that the Centre ceded the island without passing a resolution in Parliament and thus it is an invalid agreement. To bolster their claims politicians claim that the island was under the king of Ramanathapuram and later under the Mdaras Presidency. Over the years, especially after the end of the civil war in Sri Lanka, there have been an increasing number of reports of confrontation between Indian and Sri Lankan fishermen and cases of the Sri Lankan navy firing at Indian fishermen. More than 150 Indian fishermen have been arrested and are at present facing trial in Sri Lankan courts.

The manner in which the Centre ‘ceded’ Kachchatheevu to Sri Lanka in 1974 should be seen not as an aberration but as a general tone adopted by New Delhi while dealing with the states. Much of the problem surrounding the rights over the island could have been avoided if in 1974 the Centre had taken the then state government in Tamil Nadu into confidence. Today, a similar pattern can also been seen in the way the Centre has gone about unilaterally on its decision to carve out a Telangana state out of Andhra Pradesh, so much so that it has not even won the support of its state leaders on the decision.
For our democracy to be robust and to function in the manner it is meant to, the Centre cannot treat the states as lackeys. States should be seen as equal partners in the democratic process and in decision-making and should be consulted on matters that concern the respective state. This is all the more important in a coalition era where regional parties play an important role in government formation at the Centre.

Who’s responsible for the damage of public property?

More often than not it is public property that becomes the prime target and is the worst hit during a protest or riot, irrespective of whether it is called by a political party or any two-paisa outfit looking for its five seconds of fame. The ongoing protests and violence in Rohtak, in Haryana and Villupuram, in Tamil Nadu reflect this dangerous trend where it is considered alright to vandalise public property and cause inconvenience to public life when grievances are not met. Tension in Karontha village, in Rohtak over the ownership of the Satlok Ashram turned violent when police, present to give protection to the ashram as per court orders, stopped protesting members of the Arya Prathinidhi Sabha from entering the ashram. In the ensuing violence three people were killed and hundreds were injured. Public transport vehicles were torched in addition to traffic being blocked on major roads. Similarly, the protests by the PMK claimed three lives, saw 16 vehicles torched, more than 800 vehicles damaged, two bridges damaged by explosives and more than 150 trees felled or torched. Whatever be the perceived injustice the aggrieved groups feel, there is no justification for violence and violence of this scale by no stretch of its meaning can be called a protest. This is simply a macabre display of highhandedness or goondaism.
The right to freedom of expression, with reasonable restrictions, and the right to assemble peacefully is a fundamental right enshrined in our Constitution. Peaceful protests were a tool used by our leaders to fight the colonial British to win our freedom. However, this right has been misinterpreted, misused and abused by all and sundry. Vandals ransacking the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute in Pune in 2004, right wing groups vandalising paintings of MF Husain and other artistes, the quota protests by Gujjars blocking the Delhi-Jaipur highway, etc, show that protests for many mean to give the other party a bloody nose and destroy public property. What protesting groups fail to realise is that their right to protest does not supersede the right of someone to peaceful living.
While political parties and other groups are quick to highlight the deplorable condition of public transport and other public services, they are also the first ones to vandalise them. This should stop — now. Stronger laws, and its effective enforcement, need to come in place to ensure that public property is protected. Punishment in the form of fines and jail terms depending on the severity of the damage caused, need to be enforced. In this light Tamil Nadu chief minister J Jayalalithaa has rightly stated that the government will claim the damages from the PMK responsible for the mayhem using the Tamil Nadu Public Property (Prevention of Damage and Loss) Act, 1992. It is to be seen if Haryana chief minister Bhupinder Singh Hooda will take such a stand.

A Hobson’s Choice on Energy

The Supreme Court on Monday gave its go-ahead for the operationalising of the first unit of the Kudankulam Nuclear Power Project (KNPP) in Tirunelveli district, Tamil Nadu. The court was of the view that the plant is safe and its functioning was essential for the larger interest of the nation and its economic growth. The apex court’s view, keeping the economic growth of the nation in mind, is a welcome step. However, as also noted by the court, it is essential that there is no compromise when it comes to ensuring safety and monitoring the operations of the plant.
The KNPP deal was struck in the ’80s between the USSR and India but only took momentum since 2011. The Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant disaster in 2011 and the Rawatbhata nuclear plant leak in 2012, in addition to the earlier accidents in Chernobyl and Three Mile Island, have eroded public trust in nuclear energy. Developed nations in the West are gradually switching to other sources for meeting their energy requirements. However, given that the nation needs to produce energy to fuel its growth trajectory, India is left with a Hobson’s choice when it comes to nuclear energy. That the reliance on alternate sources of clean energy has fallen woefully short of meeting the ever-growing energy need tilts the balance more in favour of nuclear energy.
A great deal of the suspicion and fear that the KNPP will be detrimental to the people’s lives and livelihoods in and around the plant is because, as put by M S Swaminathan, ‘there was a greater need for communication between scientists and local communities’. That the governments, both the State and Centre, have failed to win the confidence of the local people is evident from the strong protests that have been going on for two years now. There is also a need to check that the reactor does not have substandard equipment. This fear gathers momentum as allegations of corruption have been levelled against Zio-Podolsk, which is a subsidiary of the Russian firm Rosatom involved in building the KNPP. Based on Russian media reports that Zio-Podolsk was involved in supplying products for reactors in China and India, China has started a quality check on its nuclear reactors. There is no reason why India should not do a similar check. Various issues like the disposal of nuclear waste, discharge of hot water from the plant into the sea, its impact on marine life, the displacement of nearly one lakh people in a 16-km radius of the plant, etc, need to be satisfactorily addressed. Meeting India’s growing energy needs and ensuring environment safety is a tightrope walk for the government. The challenge is in succeeding in this delicate balance act.

Manmohan Singh's Koodankulam Moment

Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s statement that the protests at the Koodankulam Nuclear Power Plant have been motivated and encouraged by United States-based non-governmental organisations (NGOs) has given credence to a long-held view that foreign vested interests are orchestrating protests by fanning among the people a sense of hysteria and thus stalling the nation’s growth. Earlier also speculations were raised about the way massive protests have been undertaken to stall the commissioning of the 9,200 MW Indo-Russian nuclear energy venture.

While the anti-nuclear protesters have rubbished the prime minister’s statement, made to American journal Science, the Bharatiya Janata Party, the principal opposition party at the Centre, has rightly asked the government to disclose the details based on which the statement was made. The natural step for the Congress-led government would be to place the facts before the nation for the people to see and decide. If found to be true, strict action should be taken against the NGOs for trying to act against our national interests. This also stresses the need for more accountability into the running and funding of NGOs — especially those with international connections — across the country.

Indian economy is passing through a turbulent time and for the economy to grow, the present level of power generation is not sufficient. Power plants, like the one at Koodankulam, are essential for meeting this challenge. Any force, within or outside the country, conniving to hamper the realisation of this should be treated as working against national interest. However, this being said, it is the government’s responsibility to address the genuine fears of the people living around the plant about their safety, especially after what was witnessed at Fukushima in March 2011. The government is duty-bound to meet the growing demand for power in the country and at the same time win the confidence of the people. The question is: will the UPA be able to rise up to the occasion?
(This appeared as an editorial in The New Indian Express on Saturday February 25)

I also did it. Finally! - Part Two

(From 'I also did it. Finally!')

After everything was over, I did not know what to do – ‘Should I say ‘thank you’? Do I shake hands?’ I thought. I had not rehearsed this part in my mind. I just walked away without giving or waiting for any pleasantries. I don’t think I turned back either.

I am not sure how many would have had such an experience, even remember when they did it first and how many would be open about mentioning it.

(To be continued…)



It happened on Saturday (March 26, 2011). It was about five-thirty in the evening. The Sun had lost its way in the midst of the many high-rise buildings in the city. Twilight was setting in. I was returning after an interview with two film chief technicians. The interview was at their office in Kodambakkam (yeah the place is notorious for certain nefarious activities and has a locally synonymous connotation) and I must confess that though I’ve been in Chennai for a long time my knowledge about the area is poor. The roads are not familiar and so the traffic arrangement appeared funny.

It happened at a one-way which was bifurcating to the left and right. I had to go to the right but was in the lane turning to the left. Thinking it was fine to turn to the right, I took a turn and there in front of me was a traffic constable. He was in a hurry and reached for my ignition keys. I gestured assuring him that I surrendered and pulled over to the side. (There was a sense of satisfaction on the face of the constable and his companions. It was as though they were a pack of wolves who were salivating at the sight of a trapped sheep).

I got off the vehicle and went to the constable who was resting his arm on the bonnet of his Bolero. “You know it was a mistake.” I was in no mood to argue – there were no traffic signs in the vicinity. “You know, you could have met with an accident.” I did not know how to feel. Should I be happy that the Tamil Nadu Police are so concerned about the safety of motorists? “The fine is Rs 1,350.”

‘No way, this guy should be kidding’, I thought. Here I was like a dog caught in the blaze of a headlight on the highway. I smiled at him. It was more like a please-don’t-screw-me smile. He repeated the ‘Rs 1,350’ part a few more times till he was sure it sank in. After a bit of haggling, in which I told him that the amount he had quoted was too harsh, he asked “You tell me how much should I write? You choose.” It was the month-end and I presume each police station had a certain number of traffic violation cases they had to book, and thereby fill the government coffers.

Maybe he felt sad for me. He would have realised that my purse was not fat enough for the time he was investing. From the initial quote he offered a 50 per cent cut. It was end-of-season-SALE for the police as well. ‘Up to 50 % OFF’.

He enquired about my employer. ‘This was my chance to be the topdog’. I told him that I was from the ‘Press’. On hearing this he was a bit surprised. The senior officer, who until then was busy on some paperwork, turned and looked at me.

There was a pause that didn’t last very long. The constable offered a revised quote. From 50 per cent he offered a discount of 80 per cent. Now that was not bad! The ‘Press’ worked.

Finally we settled for an amount. He took the money in the infamous underhand swift action. I’m not sure if he slipped it into his trouser pocket or into a compartment in his service cap. I asked him if there was a receipt or chellan for the transaction (I would have framed it). It was his turn to smile. It was a you-should-be-kidding-me smile.

I started my vehicle and zoomed away. I was feeling bad that I had settled to give a bribe. I did some thinking on the way (there was a lot of time for that as the traffic jams were real long). The more I thought about it, the more I like it. It was my first time and it was funny. Looking back, I’m telling myself that had I been a bit more prepared, I could have walked away paying nothing. And that’s the story of my first bribe to a police official.

(The End)

A lame Rule 49(0)

The recent reports from our Tamil Nadu bureau stating the difficulties voters faced on election day at polling booths should have the Election Commission concerned given that it is considered that the five-phase general elections was relatively peaceful. The issue in mention is the widespread intimidation and harassment voters faced at polling booths for opting Rule 49(0). In a case where a voter does not favour any of the candidates contesting from a constituency and would want to exercise his/her franchise Rule 49(0) can be used where the vote would be recorded, but in favour of none.
If in Uthapuram, infamous for the caste divide, more than 500 women shied from voting zero, more than 5,000 victims of the airport expansion drive in Sriperumbudur backed out from voting --- in both cases fearing thugs hovering around the polling booths. Reports also said that voters, overcoming fear, who opted Rule 49(0) were left to the mercy of ill-informed polling officers who made them wait for hours, mocked at them and chided voters for their preference.
For all the pride we take in our democracy and elaborate voting mechanism such instances pose serious questions about the rate of inclusiveness and fairness of the system followed. The thugs at polling booths, in spite of the presence of paramilitary forces, were not local boys flexing their muscles but, in all probability, mercenaries hired by political parties to alter the tide in their favour.
The level of protocol awareness of the polling officers should also be of unease for the Election Commission. It should be agreed that while there are awareness drives to familiarise the EVM, not much is done when it comes to Rule 49(0). It is a matter of concern that the PIL filed in the Supreme Court by Peoples Union for Civil Liberties in 2004 seeking a ‘None Of The Above’ option in EVMs seems to be in limbo.
There seems to be an unfair bias that the franchise is secret only if the choice is against a name in the EVM and not while opting for Rule 49(0). This being the case, it is little surprise that large sections of the society refuse to ink their finger, in many cases mass poll boycott being reported. An option on the lines of Rule 49(0) in the EVM can prevent people abstaining from participating in democracy. With an increase in voter percentage it would also prompt political parties to introspect, field better candidates and discuss people’s issues. This is a win-win situation.