One year of Disaster: Why spare Jaya while unsparing of Mamata?

There are four English newspapers published from Chennai and other centres in Tamil Nadu, of which two were founded and thriving for several decades and the other two set their feet some years ago to cover the people of the state in their readership. Of these dailies, one has vowed to promote the cause of the present ruling party and the ego of its supremo, many a times even humbling the ADMK organ in sycophancy; and another daily trying to compete with it as and when even a slightest opportunity opened up. However there is one aspect in common for all these four ‘well-informed and intellectual’ dailies.

For instance, on May 20, the most important political news published in the Chennai editions of all these dailies was ‘West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee walking off the stage where a discussion hosted by television channel CNN-IBN on May 18 evening being recorded, angered by questions from the participant university students, on the increasing attack on women in the state, the infringement of  democratic rights by the authorities and the police action following the recently circulated e-mail by a Jadavpur Professor with graphics directed at her.’ In one daily that was the lead headline news with photograph of the incident, on the first page.

The news channel had arranged that programme on the eve of Mamata Banerjee’s rule in the state completing one year in office, with the announcement that it was a face-to-face with the Chief Minister for students of universities whomsoever, of  course with prior enrolment with the channel, and that the participants could pose any questions to the Chief Minister and the programme would be moderated by the CNN-IBN channel’s deputy editor Sagarika Ghose. During the course of the programme losing patience at one point due to intrusive questions of the enlightened students, mostly post-graduate and research students, she staged a walk-out in a huff.

That was enough for these dailies to take on Mamata Banerjee, their favourite target for criticism, condemnation, ridicule and unsolicited advices and suggestions for some months now, and there were columns and columns of reports on pages after pages. Expectedly from the next day there were splashes of editorials, news analyses, columns by their enlightened columnists, sarcastic articles, cartoons etc., in these dailies taking a dig at her and condemning her ‘intolerant attitude’, ‘anti-democratic’ action etc., So many highly critical columns and editorials, sarcastic commentaries etc., are published regularly on the reckless and irresponsible blabberings of West Bengal TMC ministers.

All that are well! Because they are the patrons and protectors of freedom of speech and opinion, democracy, healthy public debates, cultured political discourse and all other values!

But, should not these dailies, which publish their issues from Chennai and other cities for the ‘benefit’ and ‘enlightenment’ of the people of Tamil Nadu, show some of the concern shown for the people of West Bengal and to people Tamil Nadu render justice atleast for their readers?

The Chief Minister here has also completed one year in office and celebrating her ‘achievements’. These dailies are reaping the ‘benefits’ of the mega celebration in the forms of one first page ad and five more full page ads in inner pages on May 16, and everyday so far 2-3 pages of advertisements – one of a government department and the others as ‘Advertorial and Promotional Features’ and ‘Marketing Features’. We don’t know for how many more days these ads will be released!

Will any of the 100 plus television channels in India come forward to arrange an ‘Open House’ programme in which anyone can participate and pose any question, with Tamil Nadu Chief Minister as the Chief Guest? Even if any channel dare to come forward, will the Tamil Nadu Chief Minister agree to participate?

Why do these super-scholarly English dailies, publishing so many news reports and critical columns about the speeches and actions of Mamata Banerjee and her Cabinet colleagues in West Bengal, voluntarily close their eyes and ears to the arrogance, atrocities, megalomania, vindictiveness, whimsicality, authoritarian attitude etc., of Jayalalitha, the absurdities of her minion ministers, thousands of crores of rupees of people’s tax money drained for the whims and fancies of an individual, the education of over one crore school children devastated, over 13,000 families left is lurch, Tamil Nadu facing unprecedented judicial strictures by any state in the history of Independent India, courts disposing all that the Chief Minister proposes, the prestigious Tamil Nadu Assembly being turned into Bhajan Mutt and democracy trampled, the bureaucracy and police and ministers, shuffled and reshuffled so frequently that everyone in the government feel insecure resulting in administrative paralysis, investors reluctant to deal with this one-person government/ administration… the list of Tamil Nadu’s woes go on.

But these English dailies not only spare Jayalalitha of even any slightest criticism but for reasons best known to them try to project her for most undeserving capacities. Conveniently forgetting their blistering attack on her role during those 13 fateful months in 1998 and 1999 when she held the NDA government led by A.B.Vajpayee, for ransom and brought it down for not obliging to her personal demands and thrusting an election on the country, they are now unashamedly projecting Jayalalitha for a national role and for, what people would shudder even to think, Prime Ministership!

Just days prior to the anniversary fete when a reporter pointed out increasing incidents of illegal sand mining and loot, and asked what the government proposed to do, without any sense of responsibility, she coolly said she had no information. After two days she issued a statement vouching that illegal sand mining would be dealt with iron hand and that it was rampant during the DMK rule and on her assuming charge she directed officials to take severe action against the sand mafia. Her statement was dutifully published prominently by these dailies without any comment. If only they go through their records of the past one year, they can find out how many incidents of sand lootings and killings had taken place. If the people wonder whether such a person was fit to continue as CM, they won’t be wrong.

What is happening in the State Assembly? Can any sensible person sit through and listen to the entire proceedings on all the days of its session, and honestly vouch for the dignity and decorum of the House. Let them not publish commentaries on the proceedings or the portions expunged by the Speaker. It would be sufficient if they publish ad verbatim the speeches of ADMK ministers and members, members of fraternal parties and the Speaker, which the Chief Minister enjoy listening. People will understand what is happening in the Assembly and the standard of the Chief Minister! Why those dailies like ‘Daily Thanthi’ which publish Jayalalitha’s statements/ announcements under Rule No. 110 without omitting even a letter, do not publish the following speeches of her ministers and members, allies and the Speaker paying encomiums to her? Are they ashamed? Does civilized culture prevent them?

Some senior and sensible journalists working in these dailies resent that news analyses, reviews of Assembly proceedings, investigative reports filed by their district reporters and even columns by regular columnists are not published as a whole or mostly edited and castrated versions only are published.

What is the need for protecting Jaya regime like that? If it is only for the sake of getting government advertisements, can these newspapers that complain of commercialization of education, commercialise journalistic ethics and freedom of the press?  Is there undeclared state of Emergency in Tamil Nadu? During the DMK rule also, they were getting all government ads, but still they were publishing all sorts of false, baseless and unfounded reports about the government and the then Chief Minister Kalaignar also untiringly issuing refutals and clarifications!

So, what has happened to these dailies? Are they frightened by the ‘rehearsal’ carried out on the office of Tamil journal ‘Nakkeeran’ and against its editor, reminiscent of the events of 1991-96 and 2001-06 periods? Is fear the only reason for unduly protecting and projecting Jayalalitha, or something else?

One year of Disaster: An Irresponsible CM!

On May 17, a day after all the newspapers in Tamil Nadu and all over India carried first page full page advertisement and five or six full-page advertisements in their inside papers, all these dailies – both Tamil and English dutifully published with very bold headlines Jayalalitha’s statement that her “government will deal with illegal sand mining with an iron hand” and that immediately on taking over office, she had directed officials to take stringent action on the sand mafia. Accusing as crucial that illegal sand mining was rampant during the previous DMK rule, she had said they were effectively checked now as a result of which the government’s revenue from sand mining had increased, according to those faithful reports in these dailies. Of course, she could not feign ignorance about the incident in Tirupathur on May 12 when a government official (VAO) was attacked by a sand mafia and he was about to be buried alive and saved because of the timely alert by a rag-picking girl and mentioned about it in her statement that the search was on for nabbing the culprits. But locals had said that as those who carried out illegal sand mining were ADMK men and hence the police had not taken any action.

However not even a single daily, even while publishing the statement of Jayalalitha, recalled that two days prior to the day of her assertion, she told a reporter who asked ‘what is the action taken by the government to prevent increasing loot of sand in the state?’ that ‘she had no such information’. This callous reply of a ‘responsible’ chief minister was also published in those very newspapers. Will not the people, who voted her to power, wonder whether Jayalalitha is fit to be the Chief Minister?

On the very same day of her issuing this statement, by late evening on May 16, drinking water was supplied as usual for 20 villages within the limits of 4 panchayats of Devanur, Pudur, Chellapampalayam and Ravanapuram near Udumalpet in Tirupur district, from the four circle wells in River Palar, when people noticed the water unusually greenish and stinking. As there was no rain, water had stagnated like a pond over which for about 50 feet area some sort of a liquid on green colour had spread. Suspecting it might be poison the water supply was immediately stopped and the villagers were immediately alerted by tom-tom not to use the water already supplied, resulting in scare among the residents. Government officials had rushed to the spot and sent samples of water from the wells and river to a lab in Tirupur for test which confirmed that it was pesticide. However the entire water was pumped out and villagers took care that their cattle did not drink the water. The water samples had been sent to central lab in Coimbatore for testing.

The villagers are shell shocked over poisoning of the drinking water which they suspect must be the handiwork of illegal sand smugglers in Palar. Despite their repeated complaints to authorities no action was taken to prevent sand smuggling and hence the people of the area closed the routes to the riverbed with chains. They suspect that the sand looters were enraged and might have resorted to this heinous act. They had given complaint to the police to nab the culprits who poisoned drinking water.

Now Jayalalitha had first said she had no information on illegal sand mining and smuggling and then said she had directed officials to take stringent action, immediately after assuming power. Is she speaking the truth? Certainly not!

Every time, the ADMK comes to power a particular man said to be close to the Poes Garden ‘queen’ is given the licence to loot the river beds and another person in Tirunelveli – Tuticorin districts, the licence to plunder the mine-rich sands of coastal areas in southern district. Under the ruling party’s political patronage the sand mafia do not hesitate to mow down officials, protestors and attack whistle-blowers.

Recently on March 12,  The sand mafia claimed another life in Tamil Nadu, after a truck laden with illegally mined sand ran over a youth who organized a protest in Mittatharkulam, a village in Tirunelveli district. Sathish Kumar, 21, was trying to stop people from transporting sand from Nambiyaru river, which ran along his village, when the truck mowed him down. Villagers alleged that the truck belonged to an ADMK functionary and that the driver was his brother.

Mittatharkulam in southern Tamil Nadu has been fighting mining of sand from the bed of the Nambiyar, the only source of drinking water for more than 15 villages, for over a decade. Political parties have been aiding the mafia, villagers alleged.

In that morning, Sathish, son of Esther Vincent Kumar from Mittatharkulam, found the sand mafia at work and alerted the villagers. Around 20 of them rushed to the spot and tried to stop the truck. Villagers said Sathish and his friends stood at one end of the road while the rest of the villagers blocked the other end. Driver Kingston, a native of Ittamozhi village, ran over Sathish while trying to flee in the truck. Kingston and the cleaner fled the spot leaving the truck behind.

Sathish, who sustained serious head injuries, died on the spot. Villagers staged a demonstration and dispersed only after officials arrived at the spot and promised action against the culprits. Villagers said the sand was being illegally ferried to Kerala. Truckers had brought coconut waste from Kerala to construct a dirt track on the river bed, they claimed.

Villagers said that the prime accused Densingh Gomas is an ADMK functionary and Kingston, the truck driver, was his brother. They say Densingh was in the truck when Kingston mowed down Sathish. After the incident, officials who came to the spot tried to spin a story as if the youth was killed in a clash, which irked the villagers and led to a protest. 11 persons, including Densingh and Kingston, had been booked and loadman Arul, from Ittamozhi, had been arrested. Police are on the lookout for 10 other accused. A series of PILs on various incidents related to illegal sand mining are pending before the HC.  “The Federation of Sand Lorry Owners Associations and the Aminjikarai Lorry Owners Associations had filed several PILs in court,” says Yuvaraj, an office-bearer with both associations.

The sand mafia is clearly out to prove a point - oppose it at your own peril. Only the previous week a Village Assistant was abducted at gun-point for making a complaint against illegal sand mining at Anaiyarkulam village near Tirunelveli and was severely beaten up before being released.

The gang that attacked Village Assistant Karuppasamy, was allegedly led by the son of a local ADMK leader. The officer, however survived the incident as people from his village staged a four-hour long road blockade demanding the immediate arrest of the ADMK leader’s son and his accomplices. Four of the gang members were sent to Palayamkottai Central prison. But not everyone who has opposed the sand mafia has been so lucky.

Government officials had faced similar assaults in the past years during ADMK regime and this time in July last, when Revenue Inspector P.Ramu was run over by a tractor smuggling sand at Thuraiyur near Tiruchi. A Revenue Divisional Officer was killed in Kanyakumari district last year.

Three Revenue Department officials were killed by speeding trucks. A Tahsildar was rendered handicapped after a sand-laden truck dashed against him during the previous ADMK regime between 2001-06.

A.R. Venkatesan and G. Punniakoti, Tahsildars; and R. Shanmugasundaram, Revenue Inspector, were killed in Kancheepuram district. On December 11, 2008, Venkatesan was on patrol duty near Manapakkam when he stopped a truck carrying illegally-quarried sand. The driver pushed him out of the truck and sped. Venkatesan died on the spot. Punniakoti and a team of officials tried to stop a truck transporting illegally-quarried stones at Erumaiyar on September 13, 2003. The driver did not stop and ran over the Tahsildar. He died on the spot of head injuries. R. Shanmugasundaram and his team tried to prevent illegal sand quarrying in the Palar at Palayaseevaram on April 20, 2003. One of the trucks in the riverbed sped, running over the Revenue Inspector.

Another illegal sand-quarrying lorry hit S. Natarajan, Tahsildar of Nanguneri. He suffered multiple fractures in the left leg and arm and can now move around only in a wheelchair. Natarajan sustained multiple fractures when he tried to stop a lorry, allegedly engaged for illegal sand mining near Rajakkalmangalam on the Nambiyaru riverbed, about 35 km from Kanyakumari. Surgeries were performed on his right and left hands, left thigh, left leg and left shoulder in a private hospital at Nagercoil. The official received serious injuries in the hip also, as the lorry knocked him down.

According to Revenue Department sources, around 1.15 a.m., Natarajan, the Ervadi Revenue Inspector, Kannan; and the village heads, Kannan and Muthukrishnan, went to Rajakkalmangalam where a Government sand depot had been functioning before it was closed down on Madras High Court orders. On seeing the officials, the illegal sandminers tried to flee the riverbed in two lorries.

One of the lorries knocked down Natarajan, who took position on a narrow sand stretch, and fled. The driver of the second lorry parked his vehicle amidst thorny bushes, about 150 metres away from the scene of incident, where there was a pool of blood and pieces of the damaged windscreen. The then Jayalalitha government was forced to cancel sand mining leases and take over all quarrying.

In July 2011, a Revenue Inspector P Ramu was run over by a tractor smuggling sand in Thuraiyur near Tiruchirapalli, while trying to stop it from smuggling the sand. A Revenue Divisional Officer (RDO) was killed in Kancheepuram district last year.

The two incidents seem to have signalled a renewed boldness of the mafia that had mowed down senior revenue officials in Kancheepuram and Vellore district in 2003 and 2004, where the Palar River yields good quality sand. Tirunelveli officials too fight almost loosing battle against the sand mafia who smuggle sand from small rivers that run through the region and also the Tamiraparani.

The nexus between the mafia, lorry owners, drivers and lower level ADMK men continue now with the return of their party to power.

But Jayalalitha first said she had no information on illegal sand mining but two days later vows that they will be dealt with iron hand. How can she, when her own administration hand in glove with her minions indulging in these illegal acts? If people of Tamil Nadu, by their own experience, wonder whether Jayalalitha is fit to be the Chief Minister of the state, they are certainly not wrong.”

Political turning point: What happened then?

The erstwhile Odisha Chief Minister late Biju Patnaik, had in 1979 almost pulled off a merger of the DMK and the ADMK floated by MGR, according to DMK President Kalaignar M.Karunanidhi.
In an epistle addressed to party cadres two days after Chief Minister Jayalalitha described Biju Patnaik as a “father figure” during the Odisha Day celebrations at the Madras University where she shared the dais with current Odisha CM Naveen Patnaik, Kalaignar recalled his own proximity to the latter.
Kalaignar said he was reminded of what he wrote about Biju Patnaik several years back in the third volume of his autobiographical book ‘Nenjukku Needhi’.
The media reported that Biju Patnaik would be involved in the efforts for the merger of the two parties. When reporters asked Kalaignar on September 8 at Vellore, he cited MGR asking reporters in Poompuhar ‘What is wrong in the merger of DMK and ADMK?” But on the same evening at a public meeting in Karaikal he had called for the defeat of DMK in Lok Sabha elections. “Anyway let us wait and see” Kalaignar told reporters.
In a meeting for the DMK and ADMK leaders arranged by Biju Patnaik at the state guesthouse in Chennai in mid-September 1979, Kalaignar said MGR had accepted the merger formula wherein the unified party would be named DMK while the ADMK flag would be retained.
He recalled a meeting between him and Patnaik in 1979 and said the ADMK founder late MG Ramachandran had okayed the merger formula where the unified party would be named DMK and the ADMK flag retained.
When Biju Patnaik met him on 12.9.79 at his residence and after a discussion for long, he told him some conditions according to the decision taken in consultation with General Secretary and frontline leaders. They were the united party should continue to be named DMK, no objection to ADMK flag, MGR might continue to be CM and after the merger, decision could be taken at the appropriate time on President, General Secretary, Treasurer and administrative functionaries. Most important matter! Immediate withdrawal of economic criteria for reservation limit Rs.9,000 ceiling in annual income which was against the spirit of social justice.
Biju felt that MGR would not have any difficulty in accepting the conditions and said he would arrange for a meeting on the next day to enable him consult the General Secretary and others. Accordingly all the district secretaries came to Chennai on 13th and consultations were held.
At the meeting DMK General Secretary Prof. K.Anbazhagan, ADMK’s V.R.Nedunchezhian and Panruti Ramachandran were present.
Then MGR and he had talks in another room. He told MGR that besides that the DMK had properties and buildings in various places, it was also the party found by Anna and hence the name must continue after the merger.
Biju Patnaik took the initiative, as a planned meeting between MGR and Indira Gandhi on September 6 that year did not happen, with media reports attributing this to the ADMK chief’s confusion after he was apparently told by then caretaker Prime Minister Charan Singh that if he allied with the Indira Congress, he would have to pull out two cabinet ministers from the government.
Kalaignar recounted that on the same evening Biju called him and asked for an appointment to discuss an important issue. “Biju came on September 12, 1979 and discussed the merger issue with me in detail. After the discussion I had put a few conditions for the merger. We had accepted MGR to continue as chief minister. MGR had okayed the merger formula wherein the unified party would be named DMK and the ADMK flag retained,” Kalaignar said.
After Vellore, the merger talks did not continue. DMK functionaries also stated telling dissent views. When the UNI sought his reaction, Kalaignar said, “No follow up actions on other side. I think the poll alliances of the two parties will be different.”
On briefed of the developments, Biju Patnaik asked him to come to New Delhi immediately.
In the meanwhile, C.M.Stephan, a close confidante of Indira Gandhi and her cabinet minister, contacted Maran and repeatedly urged him of the Congress’ desire for alliance with DMK again, forgetting the developments in the interregnum, for a stable rule at the Centre in the interests of the nation.
“Following the DMK and Left parties supporting Prime Minister Indira Gandhi’s actions for nationalisation of banks and abolition of privy purses prior to 1971, supporting the candidature of V.V.Giri in the Presidential elections, sponsored by her and ensuring his victory, was one stage.
“In the Lok Sabha and Assembly elections held thereafter DMK aligned with the Congress (I), gave up 9 Lok Sabha seats for it and incurred victory. Subsequently, promulgation of Emergency in 1975, DMK’s opposition to it, dismissal of DMK government in 1976 – MISA cruelty. After all these, if Indira Gandhi took great efforts for electoral alliance with the DMK in 1980 and asked me to come to Delhi to meet her, is it not a political turning point?” Kalaignar asked.
He also said C Stephen, a close confidant of late Prime Minister Indira Gandhi, had contacted senior DMK leader Murasoli Maran for a tie-up between the two parties.
The DMK had earlier supported Gandhi’s initiatives such as nationalisation of banks besides backing her nominee VV Giri for president post before aligning with Congress, he said.
“Despite the DMK’s opposition to Emergency in 1975, dissolution of (his) government in 1976, and the difficulties faced due to MISA (Maintenance of Internal Security Act under which Emergency-era arrests of leaders were made), she (Gandhi) inviting me to Delhi to discuss about alliance in 1980-- is it not a big turning point in politics,” he said.

DMK will dig up land-grab cases to target ADMK - Resolutions of the DMK Lawyers Wing meet

The DMK Lawyers Wing on May 12 threatened to dig up land-grab incidents during the previous ADMK regime (2001-2006) and pursue the cases legally.
A resolution adopted at a meeting of the DMK’s Lawyers Wing at the party headquarters in Chennai said the ruling ADMK had been adopting repressive measures with the help of police to malign the party. The DMK advocates will use the RTI Act to fight the cases.
The ADMK regime thought that the functioning of the DMK could be crippled by foisting more and more cases against DMK functionaries and even while they were legally facing in various courts they foisted new (cases) with the evil intention of creating a bad name for them among the public. If action could be taken on complaints of land grabbing pertaining to the period from 2006-11, was there no need for action for such instances during the previous ADMK regime from 2001-06. So the DMK lawyers would find out such land grabbing instances from 2001-06, compile them, clarify in the people’s court, give complaints to the police and take efforts for legal action.
Generally, when complaints were filed with the police, they must make a formal enquiry to find out truth in it and then only file FIR and take action. On the other hand under instructions of the ADMK regime, the police resort to arrest without any enquiry, if bail was granted by the court on the complaint, they arrange for yet another complaint within a few minutes and arrest the person again without any enquiry and this process continued resulting in prolonged incarceration of DMK cadre.
If the arrested persons turned close to the ruling party, the complaints themselves came forward and withdraw that complaints. If so at whose instance they filed complaints? How did the police take action without verifying the truth of the complaints? What is the action against such complaints for misusing police and courts?
Abusing the Goondas Act against DMK cadre, harassing their family members in police stations in midnights, and keeping even innocent people on tenterhooks of fear – were all violations of personal freedom enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution.
Resolution urging the Centre to withdraw the Higher Education and Research Bill interfering in the powers of Bar Council of India, urging the Tamil Nadu government to increase the welfare fund to Rs.five lakhs were also adopted.
“The meeting also resolved to include the chief secretary, home secretary and director general of police in these cases. Defamation cases will also be filed against the complainants who lodge false cases,” said DMK Lawyers Wing secretary R S Bharathi. About 1,500 advocates from across the state participated in the meeting, he said.
The Lawyers Wing condemned the police for “violating legal principles” and taking leaders and functionaries into custody without investigation. When the cadres get bail, they are foisted with new cases subsequently. The police misuse the Goondas Act and harass the kith and kin, including women, by interrogating them at night in the police stations, said the resolution, apparently referring to the arrest of former minister K P P Samy and interrogation of his family members in connection with a murder case.
Therefore, a resolution was passed calling for daily updates on cases filed against DMK men and their families and its progress to be sent to the party headquarters email id (headquarters@dmk.in). The resolution called for updates on the cases filed by DMK advocates against the State or police .

‘Face foisted cases valiantly and wisely’

DMK President Kalaignar called upon Party lawyers to face false cases foisted by the Jayalalitha regime to take vengeance on the DMK, valiantly and wisely.
Presiding over the meeting of DMK Lawyers Wing on May 13, he appreciated the lawyers of the Party for turning out in full strength ready offer their services unable to tolerate the attempts to harm the Party.
Addressing the DMK Lawyers Wing meeting in Chennai, he said the party, himself and General Secretary Prof. Anbazhagan had faced several cases including Jain Commission in the past. He said compared to them, the cases faced by the party workers now were nothing.
Alleging that the Jayalalitha-led government was against his party cadres including former Minister K.P.P. Samy, he said even CPI(M) members expressed doubts over the law and order situation in the state.
Speaking on the occasion, DMK President Kalaignar  exhorted the members to deal with the cases with alacrity. Since the ADMK returned to power, many senior leaders, including former ministers, have been facing land-grab charges based on complaints from private individuals.
Kalaignar accused the Jayalalitha-led government of acting with intent to wreak vengeance on DMK members. “Party cadres, their kith and kin are subjected to oppression and harassment,” he said. Detailing how the party and its leaders faced several bigger cases in the past, the DMK chief said the land-grab cases were insignificant and any plan to destroy the DMK with these cases will not be successful.
Referring to the murder of K N Ramajayam, brother of former DMK minister K N Nehru, and the fact that the Trichy police are yet to nab the culprits behind it even after two months, the DMK chief wondered whether there was any law and order in the state.
Kalaignar warned policemen in the State for their excesses against DMK party functionaries, saying their actions would turn against them. He said that he had witnessed what had happened to the families of policemen who had tortured the party’s cadre during the Emergency period — it had to be considered ‘karma’ according to superstitions.
“Police should listen to such episodes so as to learn to control their outrage against the party cadre. I am duty-bound to make this request through our forum for advocates,” he warned.
Kalaignar also took a dig at the State police by saying that it was not only the DMK but also the CPI which was concerned about the law and order situation prevailing in the State.
Besides Kalaignar who chaired the meeting, party functionaries including General Secretary Prof. K Anbalagan, Principal Secretary Thiru Arcot N Veeraswami, Deputy General Secretary Thiru V.P.Duraisamy, and Lawyers Wing Secretary Thiru R S Bharathi attended.
Kalaignar noted during his speech that he was aware of the undue turmoil faced by former Minister Thiru K P P Samy and his family.
Referring to the vindictive actions taken against former Minister Thiru K.P.P.Samy and his family members and cruelties inflicted on his relatives and friends, Kalaignar said such reports had made everyone, including CPI friends wonder whether there was rule of law in the state. Even after two months, the police was unable to trace the culprits in the murder of K.N.Nehru’s brother Ramajeyam. It was during the previous ADMK regime that former Mylapore MLA M.K.Balan was missing when he went for morning walk and later reported to have been murdered.
“As Jayalalitha wield state power and money power, the lawyers’ wing had to work and face the cases valiantly and also wisely”, he said citing an instance of his lawyer’s brilliant cross examination of a police officer in a Madurai court in the case for burning copies of the constitution.

“I’ve relaunched TESO for UN referendum on Tamil Eelam”- Kalaignar's interview

 

With the continuing reticence of the Sri Lankan regime to address the genuine grievances of Tamils in the island nation and taking into account the international concern over denial of justice for those people, DMK President Kalaignar M.Karunanidhi said that he had relaunched Tamil Eelam Supporters Organisation (TESO) to make the United Nations to conduct a referendum on Tamil Eelam and had requested Government of India to take all efforts for the formation of Separate Tamil Eelam.

The following is an interview of Kalaignar to the English weekly ‘The Week’ published in its issue of May 20.

Q : Has the ADMK government delivered its pre-poll promises?
Kalaignar: They are implementing even what they haven’t promised in the manifesto! For instance, the new government had abandoned the New Secretariat Complex constructed at a cost of around Rs.1,000 crore and continues to function from the old complex despite the congestion there, by being more adamant. This is one its successes. The announcement saying Rs.100 crore, new Anna Centenary Library will be converted to a hospital, only because it was constructed during the DMK regime, is another success! The reversal of Tamil New year from the month of Thai, which was decided by Tamil scholars and poets even decades before, to Chithirai, is another success! It is mainly because I issued orders for the same during my regime. Only because I fought to get classical status to Tamil Language as dreamt by Tamil scholar Parithimar Kalaignar, hundred years before, the throwing out of rare books and manuscripts from the Paavendar classical Tamil Research Library and destroying the library overnight is a success! DMK dreamt of a state without huts. For this the DMK government had brought a concrete house project and the first phase was already over. At this the dumping of this scheme is a big success! The staying of the Rs.1,815 crore elevated Highway project from Chennai harbor to Maduravoyal, for which our Prime Minister had laid the foundation stone, only because it was launched during the DMK regime, is a Himalayan success. The ADMK government is keen on making success by implementing whatever it had not said in the manifesto- it is keen on doing the opposite- but not worried about implementing the manifesto or whatever it had promised in the manifesto.

Q: Have the people of the state accepted the price rise? What do you have to say on the government’s power management?
A: This question of yours is a self reply to your earlier question! With the government entrusted to earn over Rs.18,000 crore as revenue through TASMAC, there is no urgent need for the government for increasing the prices of milk or bus fare or power tariff. That is why the DMK government did not indulge in increasing the prices of essential commodities. You have asked if the people have accepted this increase. But Jayalalitha government has never thought if the people will accept this or not. The increase in power cut timing and pushing the state into dark, and increasing the power tariff by 37 per cent are self explanatory of this government’s power management.

Q:    Do you think the voice of the opposition is stifled in the Assembly?
A: It is not that the members of the Treasury bench and the ministers do not allow the opposition to function. Even the Speaker, who has to run the proceedings of the Assembly, himself gets into hitting at the opposition. For instance a Speaker even if he is from a particular party has to function setting aside his party leanings, his duty being to save the democratic rights of the members in the House. But the Speaker himself says, “ K is upset because of the new schemes brought out by our Chief Minister. By saying ‘K’  I did not mean anyone. I meant, only Kadathalkarargal (hijackers), Kalvargal (thieves).” This is all unwanted. But I am not worried about all these. The world has to know, in what way the Speaker is running the proceedings of the House. I am only worried that the House which has a long history is now led in such a way. Likewise, the leader of the House rises up every now and then and attacks the DMK, particularly me in a very bad manner.

Q: You have been leading the party for more than 43 years now. In the 2011 General elections, DMK was pushed to the third position. Why?
A:  It is a common, known fact that after 1989, there has been change in governments every five years. Despite DMK implementing various welfare schemes during the last five year rule. I don’t deny the fact that we lost badly in the 2011 state elections, because of the mistakes of some of the members of the DMK. A campaign was run by others by exaggerating the mistakes. The votes against DMK increased because of these mistakes and it turned in favour of the ADMK. But the same situation which happened for the DMK after full five years has happened to the ADMK in the first one year regime. You yourself might have come to understand this through your experience.

Q:  In U.P., Samajwadi Party leader Mulayam Singh Yadav had crowned his son Akilesh yadav as the Chief Minister. Is it time for DMK to give way for its young generation?
A: There are lots of differences between DMK and Samajwadi Party. It is a national party and we are a regional party even though we play a role in the Parliament. Mulayam Singh had not quit from active politics. He performs his duty in the Parliament while deputing his son as the Chief Minister of the state. We cannot compare U.P. politics with that of Tamil Nadu politics. In Tamil Nadu, as far as DMK is concerned, the situation is such that, the young generation will function more actively as per the advice of the seniors and by following their past experiences. 

Q: Your opinion on MK Stalin’s managerial skills…
A: As the party’s Youth Wing State Secretary, as the Party Treasurer, in the government as Chennai Mayor, as the Local Administration Minister, as the Deputy Chief Minister, he has proved himself as one of the best managers. He works untiringly. He is more concerned about people’s welfare.

 Q:   How would you rate Alagiri as a Union Minister?
A: As a Union Minister, he always thinks what good he can do for the people through his Ministry and he is skilled in implementing it. He is happier as the party’s South Zone Organising Secretary rather than by functioning as a Minister in the Union cabinet. He is much inclined towards strengthening the party by being more affectionate to the party cadres as the party’s South Zone Secretary. 

Q:  Reasons for renewing TESO….
A: The ills faced by the Sri Lankan Tamils do not seem to come to an end. The Sri Lankan President  failed to keep his words many a times now. The Tamil diaspora is worried about their future. The DMK despite, fighting for the Sri Lankan Tamils since 1956, time has still not come for their welfare. Considering all these again and after taking into account the support from all, US-sponsored resolution at the UN against Sri Lanka, I have relaunched TESO, to make the UN conduct a referendum . I have requested the Government of India to take all efforts
 for the formation of Separate Tamil Eelam.  

The other questions posed to Kalaignar and answers given by him are as under:

Q:     Do you think the DMK dons the role of a perfect opposition party in the state as  DMDK has failed to function as a concrete opposition party?
A: Officially DMDK is the opposition party. I cannot say that it is not functioning as a concrete opposition party as you say. As far as DMK is concerned, it does its duty for the welfare of the people even if it is in the opposition.

Q:   Are there any obstacles in your giving way for the young generation so as to enable the party function more actively as it was when you were young?
A: Absolutely, there are no obstacles. During my younger days many of the party leaders were young. Now in our party both seniors and younger generation are functioning together by realizing their position in the party. Even when there are no impediments in giving way for the young generation, they are willing to take the advice and assistance of the seniors and work.

 Q:   You have always been saying that “I want to be one among you, as a cadre in the party.” Has the time come for this?
A: I am one among you – I am still a cadre like you. I am always like that.

Q:   Last time the DMK played a very important role in the President of India elections? Does DMK enjoy the same clout now?
A: Not only now, every time, during the Indian President Election DMK has been performing its duty.  

Q:   Your voice for ‘Separate Tamil Eelam’ is being viewed critically. It is said you adopt a particular stand when in power and a different stand when not in power. Please answer to your critics in this issue.
A: DMK had always voiced its concern for Sri Lankan Tamils whether in power or not,. But there may be differences in the way of approach. For instance in 1989, when Rajiv Gandhi was the Prime Minister, I requested him to save the Sri Lankan Tamils. In 1990 when the IPKF came back home from Sri Lanka, I refused to extend welcome to the IPKF personnel, after they faced allegations of excesses against Tamils in Sri Lanka. When DMK was the ruling party on April 23, 2008 and on November 12, 2008, we passed a resolution in the State Assembly requesting the Union government to save the Sri Lankan Tamils.  On October 10, 2008 I called Indian Prime Minister over phone and asked him to take necessary steps to stop the war in Sri Lanka. On October 14, I called for an all party meeting at the secretariat. On October 24, we had orgainsed for mammoth human chain in Chennai. On December 4, 2008, I led an all party delegation to Delhi to meet the Prime Minister and request him in person. We also insisted that Pranab Mukherjee be sent to Sri Lanka. When DMK was in power, we raised over Rs.50 crores as funds from the people of the state and sent food packets, medicines and clothes to the Sri Lankan Tamils on behalf of the government. We launched “Sri Lankan Tamils Welfare rights forum.” On February 21, 2009, we had organized for “youth chain” on behalf of DMK’s youth wing in Chennai and all district headquarters. On April 24, we called for a strike in Tamil Nadu. ON April 28, 2009, I took up fasting as a single man and insisted for the stoppage of the war. All these we did when DMK was in power. Likewise in 1956, when I was 34, I proposed a resolution in favour of Sri Lankan Tamils at the Chidambaram General Council. On August 8, 1977 I organized a mammoth public rally in which five lakh people took part. On August 13, 1981, I had sent a telegram requesting the Prime Minister to save Sri Lankan Tamils. On September 15, 1981, I was arrested by the then ADMK government for Sri Lankan Tamils issue. On July 25, 1983 when Thangadurai, Kuttimani, Jagan and 35 others were massacred by the Sinhalese in the Velikadai prison, I had organized a rally in Chennai. On August 8, 1983, Party’s General Secretary Prof. Anbazhagan and I resigned as MLAs from the assembly in support of the Sri Lankan Tamils, when the DMK was not in power. On May13, 1985, TESO (Tamil Eelam Supporters Organisation) was launched. On May 16, 1985 I was arrested for participating in a rally at Kancheepuram in favour of Sri Lankan Tamils. On August 23, 1985 we organized a rally in Chennai. On May 4, 1986, we organized a conference on behalf of TESO at Madurai. On October 15, 1987 we orgainsed a rally in Chennai. On November 6, 1987 we had orgainsed a human chain in Chennai. So whether the DMK in power or not in power we have always stood and fought for Sri Lankan Tamils. We remain the same always.

Q:   How does the Tamil diaspora and Tamil scholars support your Separate Tamil Eelam demand?
A: The Tamil diaspora all over the world, over phone and through letters, have welcomed the relaunch of TESO and they have extended support for the Independent Tamil Eelam demand.  r

Jaya’s comment amounts to Contempt of Court

When newspersons asked for her reaction to the CBI court in New Delhi granting bail to former Union Minister A.Raja in the 2G spectrum case, Jayalalitha has said, “definitely the case looks as though it is getting diluted.”

As a responsible Chief Minister, having been sworn-in by the constitution to uphold the letter and spirit of the constitution, she should have politely refused to comment on the wisdom and prerogative of the judiciary and comment. Instead her haughty comment, which she seemed to have believed was directed towards the UPA government at the Centre and the prosecuting agency CBI, was in fact a commentary on not only the CBI court but also on the Supreme Court of India.

For, the investigating and prosecuting agency, the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), is carrying out investigation directly under the monitoring of the Supreme Court and periodically keeps filing reports on the progress in investigation to the court, under the directive of the apex court. Moreover, all the other accused in the case were already granted bails by the Supreme Court and Delhi High Court and Raja was the last of them to be granted bail by the trial court. Hence Jayalalitha’s comment is nothing but tantamount to contempt of court(s).

Raja himself and the DMK itself had been consistently maintaining that he would face the care and prove his innocence. The DMK did not, like Jayalalitha, delay the trial by hook or by crook or attempted to wriggle him out by manipulation.

But did Jayalalitha have honesty and courage to squarely face corruption cases against her and come out clean? Did she not lie in the court disowning her own signature on the documents in the purchase of TANSI land only to be disproved by forensic test. Did she not surrender back the ill-gotten TANSI property and let free by the apex court ‘to atone her conscience after passing strictures?

And her attempts to drag the Disproportionate Assets case were repeatedly pulled up by the courts. When she came back to power in 2001 she tried to dilute the case by misusing power, necessitating the Supreme Court to transfer the case to a special court to Bangalore and also appointing a Special Public Prosecutor.

Once again, soon after assuming power for the third time in Tamil Nadu, one of the very first action taken by Jayalalitha, was to make a last ditch effort to save her skin – imminent conviction – in the Disproportionate Assets case tried in the Special Court in Bangalore. On her directive, the Chief Secretary conducted an extraordinary review meeting relating to cases in the Special Investigation Cell, DVAC and decided to undertake further investigation in the case against Jayalalitha, with the unstated objective of foiling the case.

Accordingly, the DVAC, Chennai, wrote directly to the judge of the Special Court trying the disproportionate assets case against Jayalalitha stating that it is continuing with the investigation.

The letter, addressed to the judge of the Special Court and the 36th Additional City Civil and Sessions Court, was delivered directly to the court officer by an inspector of the DVAC on June14. The Special Public Prosecutor (SPP) was not informed of it.

The Special Court asked the DVAC to explain in writing why it chose to write to the court directly while keeping the SPP in the dark. “What was the need to give this letter bypassing the Prosecutor? On what provision of the law have you written this letter directly to the court? Normally, whatever the investigating agency has to submit before the trial court has to be done through the prosecutor,” Judge B.M. Mallikarjunaiah told DVAC Inspector A. Immanuel Gnan Sekhar, who delivered the letter to the court.

At this juncture, SPP B.V. Acharya pointed out that the Supreme Court, while transferring the trial to Bangalore from Chennai, had condemned a similar type of conduct. He also urged the court to ask the DVAC why contempt of court proceedings should not be initiated against it.

As the judge was passing an order to summon the Deputy Superintendent of Police of the DVAC who had written the letter, it was pointed out to him that the police officer, G. Sambandam, was present in the court.

As Sambandam informed the court that he had been assisting the investigating officer for a long time and was attending the court proceedings, the Judge asked him to explain under what provisions of the law the letter had been directly sent to the court.

Acharya submitted that the court should proceed with recording the statement of the accused persons as contemplated in Section 313 of the Criminal Procedure Code, as the letter was another method intended to delay the trial. He argued that the court should not mix the issue of the letter with the main case.

Sambandam informed the court that a similar action was taken in another case in Chennai and that the instant letter was written under “instructions.” He sought time to submit his explanation in writing.

Meanwhile, counsel for the accused sought adjournment of the proceedings till the hearing on a petition filed by one of the accused (Sasikala Natarajan) before the Karnataka High Court challenging the special court's order refusing to recall a witness. Counsel stated that the hearing was adjourned to June 21 on the request of the lawyer appearing for the DVAC.

However, Acharya opposed the adjournment and submitted that the High Court had refused to stay the proceedings. The DVAC had now appointed a new lawyer to represent it before the High Court.

While rejecting the plea for adjourning the proceedings, the Special Court directed the DVAC to make available copies of the letter to the SPP and the accused. It adjourned the proceedings to June 18.

The application filed by the DVAC, intimating the court that it is investigating the case, says the Tamil Nadu Chief Secretary, who also holds charge as Vigilance Commissioner and Commissioner for Administrative Reforms, conducted a review meeting on June 3 in Chennai relating to the cases pending in the Special Investigation Cell, DVAC.

“The Chief Secretary has pointed out certain patent lapses [that have] occurred in the Special Case No. 208/2004 [disproportionate assets case against Ms. Jayalalitha and others] during the investigation and directed to rectify the lapse and discrepancies pointed out by his letter dated June 8, 2011,” the application points out.

Deputy Superintendent of Police G. Sambandam, investigating officer, also states in his application that he was submitting these facts to the Special Court by way of intimation as per the guideline of the Supreme Court, in its verdicts, that permits such further investigation without prior permission of the court.

On September 14, in a further setback to Jayalalitha, the Karnataka high court directed the DVAC, Chennai, not to undertake further investigation in the Rs 66-crore disproportionate assets case involving her.

Allowing a criminal petition filed by senior DMK General Secretary Prof. K Anbazhagan, Justice V Jagannathan directed the special court in Bangalore to adhere to the Supreme Court order of 2003 which while transferring the trial from Tamil Nadu said the special court should hold it on day-to-day basis.

"The SC has said that under the guise of further inquiry, no re-investigation or fresh investigation can be undertaken. What has been done cannot be undone," the court said. "The letter written directly to the special court on June 15, 2011 says that the Investigating Officer wants to take up further investigation from where it stopped in an effort to undo the past. Further investigation sought to be undertaken when the matter has reached the stage of recording the statement of the accused and SC had already fixed the date of appearance.

An attempt is being made to subvert the course of justice and needing this court to invoke its inherent powers available under section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code as it is an extraordinary situation,'' the judge said.

Prof. Anbazhagan sought for conducting the trial on a day-to-day basis as per the SC's directive and also that DVAC should be directed to intimate each and every move through the Special Public Prosecutor (B V Acharya ) only.

After Jayalalitha came back to power in May, DVAC had appointed another counsel (M T Naniah) to plead its case before high court. But that move was negated by the high court.

Jayalalitha suffered yet another setback on Jan.31, 2012 with the Supreme Court rejecting the Tamil Nadu government's appeal against the Karnataka High Court order refusing to entertain its plea for a further probe in the disproportionate assets case against her and four others pending before a special court in Bangalore.

A Bench of Justice Dalveer Bhandari and Justice Dipak Misra, dismissing two appeals filed by DVAC Superintendent of Police, said, “We are not inclined to interfere with the impugned order.”

The Bench asked the special court to complete the trial as expeditiously as possible, uninfluenced by the observations made by the High Court in the impugned order.

Special leave petitions were filed by the State against the orders of the Karnataka High Court quashing the decision of the DVAC to order a further probe in the wealth case.

The High Court quashed the DVAC's communication for further probe dated June 15, 2011 on a petition filed by DMK General Secretary Prof. K. Anbazhagan challenging the communication.

Senior counsel Ashok Desai, appearing for the State said, “We wanted to conduct further investigation since certain defects and infirmities were noticed.” He cited various decisions and said the right of the Investigating Officer for further probe could not be interfered with.

Justice Dipak Misra told counsel, “You [police] have a right for further probe, but at what stage is the question. If it is an attempt to frustrate the trial, the whole trial will become a mockery.”

Senior counsel Rakesh Dwivedi, who also appeared for the State, justified further probe.

Special Public Prosecutor and Karnataka Advocate General B.V. Acharya traced the genesis of the case and explained to the court how it was transferred from Chennai to Bangalore in 2004.

He said despite his best efforts the trial could not be concluded for the last eight years as application after application was being filed in the special court and the High Court and every attempt was being made to delay the process. He said in 2001 a similar attempt was made to order further investigation in the London hotel case and as a result the whole case was weakened.

The High Court pointed out this fact and had held that the intention to order further probe was not bona fide and had quashed the communication. He said the impugned order should not be interfered with.

Senior counsel T.R. Andhyarunjina, appearing for Prof. Anbazhagan, pointed out that in the meeting held on June 3, 2011 the decision for further probe was taken.

He said between May 16, 2011 and June 3, 2011 various officers were replaced and a new set of officers posted, and in the guise of reviewing various cases a decision was taken for further probe in this case.

He said in this case the chargesheet was filed in June 1997 and since then various attempts were being made by Jayalalitha to frustrate and delay the trial by all means. The intention of the government was not bona fide and if only Prof. Anbazhagan had not challenged the decision, the whole trial would have been vitiated, counsel said and sought dismissal of the appeals.

Such being her track record, she should demonstrate humility and avoid unnecessarily making thoughtless comments on judicial process in the cases of others!