At whose behest?

As if challenging the ethos of Tamils and the land of Thanthai Periyar and Arignar Anna, the Jayalalitha regime in Tamil Nadu dared to file an affidavit in the Supreme Court pleading for the scrapping of the dream project of Tamils, the Sethusamudram project that too using the name of mythical Ram and so-called Ram Sethu.
But Jayalalitha’s objections to the project were not consistent and coherent. Although ADMK election manifestos for all elections – Parliament and Assembly polls – till 2004 demanded Sethusamudram project, Jayalalitha made a somersault and wanted the project itself to be scrapped in her party’s manifesto for Lok Sabha election in 2009.
When the inaugural function for the project was held on July 2, 2005, with Prime Minister Dr. Manmohan Singh inaugurating the project works in the presence of UPA Chairperson Tmt. Sonia Gandhi and DMK President Kalaignar in Madurai, Jayalalitha, first said she was not properly invited for the function.
To this the then Union Shipping Minister Thiru T R Baalu said in Madurai on June 22, 2005 that invitation for the inauguration of the Sethusamudram Canal Project work had been faxed to Chief Minister Jayalalitha. Later the Deputy Chairman of the Tuticorin Port Trust would go and invite her in person. The Governor would also be invited as a guest, he said when asked whether the Chief Minister would be invited for the July 2 function. Asked whether he himself would invite the Chief Minister, Thiru Baalu said, “If necessary, the port trust chairman would invite her for the function.” Tuticorin Port Trust chairman S Raghupathy said, “If the Chief Minister insists that I should invite her, then I am at her command and I will go and invite her.”
But even as the preparations for the inaugural function were going on in full swing at Madurai and the jubilee and enthusiasm of the people of Tamil Nadu and more particularly southern districts, in expecting the D-Day when their centuries-old dream come true was discernible everywhere, the function turned fait accompli for Jayalalitha. Still she did not want to leave the entire credit for the DMK and the UPA government. In a lengthy statement on 25.6.2005, besides pouring her usual scorns for the DMK and Kalaignar, she also claimed credit for the project becoming a reality, saying,
“Everyone knows that I will never relent in my efforts to get major development projects for Tamil Nadu. It may be recalled that it was on the request of the late Puratchi Thalaivar M.G.R., that a Committee was constituted by the Government of India in 1981, to determine the feasibility of this Canal Project. While the Committee did find the project feasible, it was not taken up due to financial reasons. I raised this issue as a Member of the Rajya Sabha in 1984 and again in 1986 and stressed that the project should not be viewed merely in financial terms, but should be taken up keeping in view the national security concerns also.
On 10.5.1986, the Tamil Nadu Legislative Assembly moved a Resolution demanding the implementation of the Sethusamudram Canal Project without any further delay. In July, 1991, as Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu, I presented a Memorandum to the then Hon’ble Prime Minister of India, insisting that the Sethusamudram Canal Project should be taken up. It was my Government, which entrusted a new study to M/s. Pallavan Transport Consultancy Services Limited in 1994, to prepare an updated feasibility report. This was completed in 1996. It was on my insistence that the Sethusamudram Canal Project was taken up as a priority project in 1998 and an initial Environmental Impact Study was entrusted to the National Environmental Engineering Research Institute (NEERI) in March, 1998. This report was also made available in August, 1998.  Thus, I have been instrumental in ensuring that the Sethusamudram Canal Project becomes a reality.”
But then she says, “At the same time, I have always maintained that extreme precaution should be taken before actually undertaking the project, in view of the fact that this is a unique ecologically sensitive zone with rich and rare biodiversity. Further, the zone where the Sethusamudram Canal Project is to be executed is a major fishing zone, which provides livelihood to lakhs of fishermen of Tamil Nadu.  I have always maintained that before taking up the canal project, it has to be ensured by careful studies that their livelihood is not affected in any way.Any canal project, such as the Sethusamudram Canal Project involves massive dredging of the seafloor. It is elementary that in such an ecologically sensitive project, where disturbance of the seafloor is involved, maximum safeguards have to be provided after detailed evaluation.The impact on the fishing community has to be carefully evaluated and any damage to their livelihood prevented. Thus, there are very serious environmental issues relating to this project, which need careful study.The whole point is that while the project is most important, it can only be undertaken after great care and preparation, paying attention to all the environmental concerns.”
Well, what are all her admissions? First, she claims that ‘she had always maintained this and that’. It is a double boiled, double distilled lie. Never in the past in all her claims made above she  added this caveat. She can be challenged on this score. Only because of her envy for the DMK she was inventing all these to obstruct a benefit to Tamil Nadu.
After claiming that only at her insistence the NEERI report of Environmental Impact Study report was made available in August 1998, what were the attempts she made further for the realization of the project? Why after returning to power in 2001, she did not consider asking the Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board to go into all aspects of this project based on the NEERI report and waited for the announcement of the UPA government approving the project and sanctioning funds? She had said that TNPCB appointed an Expert committee to go into all aspects of this project, which had just then (June 2005) submitted its report to TNPCR. The committee found NEERI report ‘having a number of deficiencies’ and suggested many more studies. All these had to be ‘considered in detail and the Board has to forward its recommendations’ to the State government and only thereafter the State government ‘can decide on the question of furnishing No Objection Certificate’ to the Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of India?
Are not these dilatory tactics and just worthless protractions?  Much more she contended that ‘No Objection Certificate’ from the Government of Tamil Nadu was ‘mandatory’ and T.R.Baalu just bulldozed environmental clearance from the Union MEF. For all these contention of Jayalalitha, Kalaignar and T.R.Baalu replied and rubbished her allegations.
Responding to Jayalalitha’s statement on June 27, 2005, that the Centre was going ahead with the Sethusamudram Project without the No Objection Certificate from the State Pollution Control Board, Kalaignar said the Board’s clearance was neither mandatory nor was it a statutory requirement under the rules.
“The NOC (No Objection Certificate) from the State Government or TNPCB is not a statutory requirement for consideration of environmental clearance for a project for which such clearance is to be accorded by the Central Government as per the Environmental Impact Assessment,” Kalaignar said in a statement here, quoting from a Union Government Notification of January 1994.
Speaking at the inauguration of the 50-km stretch of Golden Quadrilateral at Krishnagiri, Thiru T.R.Baalu said that the TNPCB’s NOC was “not a statutory obligation”. The Shipping Ministry and the Tuticorin Port Trust, the nodal agency entrusted with the task of implementation of the project have furnished detailed and satisfactory explanation on the concerns conveyed by the common man, he said.  In spite of the obstacles put up by the State Government, the Ministry was able to elicit responses from the public and the fishermen community in six southern districts, Thiru Baalu said.
ThiruT.R.Baalu, denied Jayalalitha’s charge that the Centre had “subverted” the environmental clearance process in the implementation of the Sethusamudram Ship Canal Project (SSCP). “I am neither a novice nor foolhardy to do that,” Baalu said. He said that he had been President of the United Nations framework convention on climate change during 2002, and knew the world would be looking at him when a prestigious project like the SSCP was being implemented. He added that experts from the Alagappa Engineering College, Central Electrochemical Research Institute, and Centre for Advanced Studies, would closely monitor if any changes were taking place in the sea or in the atmosphere while dredging takes place. “The marine water quality, noise pollution, air pollution, everything would be monitored closely and report would be sent to the Tuticorin Port Trust then and there,” he said. “The project was drawing global attention; and would bring honour and prestige to Tamil Nadu and India, besides helping in the economic development of the nation and the State,” he said. “I want to concentrate on such a project rather than joining the issue (controversy over environment) with the Chief Minister or officials and create further controversy,” he said.
Meanwhile the dredging works in the Palk straits for constructing the canal was going ahead in a fast phase. It is noteworthy that Jayalalitha, who raised a hue and cry over the project in 2005 was conspicuously silent on it in 2006 prior to and during the Assembly elections in May that year. For the first time ADMK election manifesto for 2006 Assembly elections did not contain any reference to Sethusamudram project and Jayalalitha also did not raise the issue in her election campaign, fearing it will create a backlash. In fact Kalaignar in his election campaign launched attack on those opposing the Sethu project but Jayalalitha did not respond.
In fact until mid-2007, there was no other opposition to the project other than on environmental, ecological grounds and on livelihood of fishermen, which were all convincingly addressed and settled. As regards the findings of Experts Committee appointed by TNPCB, it is a universal fact that no two different experts concur on their findings and getting a unanimous approval from different experts and experts committees, is akin to chasing a mirage. Moreover, the purpose for which a committee it is appointed by a person/ institution with a purpose sets a preconceived or a pre-determined objective for the study to be undertaken and their findings will definitely reflect that position. Given Jayalalitha’s opposition to the project the experts committee appointed during her tenure did reflect her stand and found discrepancies in the report of NEERI, which is an national institution engaged in the study of environmental issues unlike ad hoc committees appointed for a purpose now and then.
On June 29, 2005, the environmental impact assessment (EIA) prepared by National Environmental Engineering and Research Institute (NEERI) for the project had been cleared at all public fora. The Ministry termed it as an unfortunate development that at the time of its implementation, its validity was being questioned.
Shipping Ministry sources said that the NOC from the state government or TNPCB is not a statutory requirement for seeking environmental clearance for the project. They added that in fact the Ministry had voluntarily sought to place the draft of NEERI report before the public of Ramanathapuram and Tuticorin. These are the places which fall under the impact area of the project. Apart from this, a presentation was also made to the environment and forest department of the state government in 2003.
Sources said that all these consultations were held much before the government started the process of formally applying for the project’s environmental clearance to TNPCB in June 2004. NEERI’s report covers all aspects addressed by TNPCB’s expert committee. These pertain to environmental settings in the project areas, assessment of environmental impacts, impact of dredging, and the overall environmental management plan of the project.
The Ministry said that it had undertaken risk analysis for the proposed channel. Keeping in mind Sri Lanka’s environmental concerns, it also conducted coastline studies. It concluded that the channel would have no impact on the coastlines of both the nations and on the offshore coral islands present around the region.
It was only after the Archeological Survey of India’s affidavit filed before the Supreme Court in mid-2007 in which some unnecessary paragraphs on Ram Bridge were included that the Sangh Parivar led by the BJP started their venomous communal campaign against the project. They planned to consolidate Hindu vote bank by whipping up a frenzy like their earlier campaign on Ram temple in Ayodya, in the run up for Lok Sabha election in 2009. Neither the Sangh Parivar nor Jayalalitha thought of so-called Ram Bridge all along the over a hundred and fifty years when the idea of Sethusamudram canal was mooted and discussed by many and a movement for the launch of project was conducted in Tamil Nadu. Even Poet Bharathiyar envisaged infringing and elevating the Adams bridge and laying a road across Palk straits in his poem, “nrJit nkLW¤Â Å rik¥ngh«.”
Jayalalitha too joined this chorus on Ramar bridge suddenly.
The Indian Express on September 13, 2007 reported under the headline ‘Jaya toes BJP lines’,
“ADMK supremo J Jayalalitha on Thursday tailored her stand on the Sethusamudram Shipping Canal Project (SSCP) to suit that of the BJP, insisting that the project be implemented without demolishing the Ram Sethu. Until now, Jayalalitha had stoutly opposed the project on the grounds that it would affect the livelihood of fishermen as well as destroy the rich marine biodiversity in the Palk Bay area.
Jayalalitha’s sudden volte face and the obvious strains within the UNPA of which she is one of the chief architects, has political circles abuzz that she might be moving closer to the BJP. While the ADMK and BJP struck up an alliance for the 2004 Lok Sabha election, the two parties faced a total rout with the DMK-led combine winning all the 39 seats in Tamil Nadu and the lone Pondicherry seat.
In a statement, Jayalalitha said the Sethusamudram Project be implemented without demolishing the Ram Sethu. She pointed out that in the past, several committees and experts had given four or five alternative schemes to implement the project without demolishing the bridge. “The Centre should explore the possibility of one of the alternative schemes and implement the project without damaging the Ram Sethu,” she said.
Relations have been somewhat strained between the ADMK and the BJP, with Jayalalitha ignoring overtures from the latter during the May 2006 Assembly election. The ADMK-led alliance included the MDMK and some smaller parties. But, the BJP contested on its own and failed to win even a single Assembly seat. While the BJP’s prospects in Tamil Nadu are rather poor, Jayalalitha might be forced to align with the party for the next Lok Sabha election if only to end her political isolation.
While Jayalalitha played a key role in forming the Third Front in June, disagreements with major constituent partners saw her issuing a stinging statement on Sunday in which she wondered whether the ADMK was still part of the UNPA and whether it continued to exist as one entity.
People all over the country were opposed to the demolition of the bridge, she said. “What is the need to demolish the Ram Sethu when the project can be implemented without destroying it?” she asked.”
Reacting to this, the Dravidar Kazhagam condemned her on Oct 18, 2007, and the PTI reported:
“Dravidar Kazhagam accused ADMK supremo J Jayalalitha of helping the cause of Sri Lanka in the Sethusamudram Ship Canal Project SSCP) and termed her reported comments as ‘anti-Tamil’.
Referring to Jayalalitha’s reported remarks that there was no need for the project and the ships could go around Sri Lanka as is the case now, DK president K Veeramani said that she was only helping the cause of Sri Lanka, “which did not want the project to come up,”
“The Sri Lankan government has been resorting to many direct and indirect means to stall the project, and her statement echoing the Sri Lankan view is condemnable,” Veeramani told reporters here. He also termed her remarks as “anti-Tamil” and alleged that she was against the state’s development.
Charging the ADMK with contradicting its stand on the issue, he read out portions of the party’s various poll manifestos, including the one for 2006 Assembly elections, in which the party had argued for the project, stating that it will result in the economic development of the state.
“She has mala fide intentions of stalling a good project,” Veeramani alleged.
He also said that “a powerful lobby was trying to unnecessarily stall a development project,”
Reacting to her contention that the project was a “threat to national security”, Veeramani wondered whether former Prime Minister A B Vajpayee, whose NDA regime cleared the project, and Prime Minister Manmohan Singh were not aware of it.”
The shady person in Indian public life Subramanian Swamy, whose sources and resources are mysterious and suspicious, took up this issue and filed a petition in the Supreme Court. (The Jain Commission of Inquiry into the conspiracy angle of Rajiv Gandhi assassination case was told by one-time lieutenant of Swamy, Velusamy about Subramanian Swamy’s secret visit to Sriperumpudur two days prior to the tragedy and meeting some persons there. The role of self styled godman Chandraswamy, Subrmanian Swamy nexus etc., However the then Central government led by P.V.NarasimhaRao, who was perceived close to the godman, did not pursue the matter seriously). Since then the project works were halted twice in 2007 and 2009. Unfortunately the UPA government also buckled and undertook to work on alternative alignment and appointed Pachauri Committee which has since submitted its report.
Subramanian Swamy’s foreign jaunts and purposes are never disclosed nor the investigative media show any interest in them. Even a month back he visited Sri Lanka to meet Rajapaksa and reportedly lobbied in US for the nation to tone down its resolution in the UNHRC against human rights violations of Sri Lanka.
Thus by taking up one reason after the other for stalling Sethusamudram project, the duo Jayalalitha and Subramanian Swamy are serving the cause of Sri Lankan regime of Rajapaksa.
DMK President Kalaignar saw the design as much back in 2009 and openly charged that Jayalalitha opposed the project due to her deal with Lanka. On April 18, 2009, kick-starting the DPA’s poll campaign at a public meeting at Purasawalkam, Kalaignar referred to the ADMK’s promise to scrap the Sethusamudram ship channel project and wondered whether voters would provide Jayalalitha with the authority. It would be suicidal. The project, when completed, would transform the economy of the State.
Recalling that the ADMK, in its manifestos for the 2001 Assembly elections and 2004 Lok Sabha polls, assured voters that the project would be implemented within a time frame, Kalaignar said what was sweetening to the Opposition party earlier had now turned bitter.
The reason for the ADMK to reject this project was due to a deal they (the ADMK) had entered into with the Lankan government to help that country as otherwise the income through shipping transport to the ports there would get reduced drastically if the distance of taking the circuitous route around Lanka was shortened (due to the opening of the Sethusamudram canal), Kalaignar said. He accused the ADMK of adopting a position that would benefit Lanka economically.
Because, the Sri Lankan regime of Rajapaksa has a vested interest in Sethusamudram canal project developed in India, will not only torpedo the prospects of his new Hambandota port but also sharply cut down the ship traffic through the traditional shipping route linking Asia and Europe via Colombo port, which in turn will spell doom on the economy of the island nation.
Hence, the Sri Lankan regime would like the Sethusamudram project not making headway and collapse.
The objections raised by Jayalalitha, Subramanian Swamy, and Sangh Parivar to the project lead people only to suspect whether they were acting in connivance with the Colombo regime.
The suspicion of people whether Jayalalitha was acting in consonance with Lanka’s interest, was buttressed by a statement laid by the then Foreign Minister of Sri Lanka late Lakshman Kadirgamar in their Parliament on July 8, 2005.
Lakshman Kadirgamar made the statement  in reply to a question by Athuraliya RatanaThera that the government should take up SSCP to the international court of justice.
Excerpts from the statement are as follows:
“The GOSL has for a long time been inviting the Indian government’s attention to SSCP’s implications for Sri Lanka. Our concerns were conveyed at various levels. The discussions were at the level of the President of Sri Lanka and the Prime Minister of India, the Ministers of Foreign Affairs and the senior officials of the two countries, at the Indo-Sri Lanka Joint Commission and at the Foreign Secretary consultations. Since the Government of India has now chosen to implement the Project on the Indian side of the Indo-Sri Lanka maritime boundary, no prior approval was sought or granted for the Project. However on the part of GOSL we have raised our concerns relating to SSCP’s likely trans-frontier impact on Sri Lanka especially in environment and livelihood areas…..
I am of course duty bound to assure the House that Sri Lanka will take all the necessary steps to safeguard the well-being and the interests of our people and our country. We would naturally do this in a calibrated and graduated manner opting first for a co-operative and consultative approach. At the moment we are engaged in that exercise. We will consider further action thereafter if and when necessary.
This is quite a constructive understanding between the two countries on a very complex issue, which I would say is a hotly debated Project in both countries. You would have seen that a few days ago Tamil Nadu Chief Minister Jayalalitha herself raised a number of concerns with regard to the Project. A study complied by an Expert Committee appointed by the Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board has reportedly highlighted specific shortcomings in the National Environment Engineering Research Institute (NEERI) Report. So have many other Indian and Sri Lankan people, civil society organizations and independent experts. We must therefore address these in a manner commensurate with excellent bilateral relations we have between India and Sri Lanka on the one hand and the economic and environmental interests of our countries and the peoples on the other hand. I have no reason to doubt that the relevant authorities in our two countries will be able to proceed on this matter with due diligence and care.
The GOSL is committed to continue the process of consultations with the Indian government to ensure that our concerns are addressed and any negative effects mitigated. The Gulf of Mannar and Palk Straits area is a shared biosphere for both India and Sri Lanka. Its development and protection of its sensitive marine life should be carried our jointly and together. Should the canal be determined to pose adverse effects to Sri Lanka, the government will explore appropriate measures and take all necessary steps to safeguard our interests”.
Now Jayalalitha regime has filed an affidavit in the Supreme Court pleading that the project be scrapped forever. Why the project she wanted in May 2004 in the run-up for Lok Sabha polls turned bitter in June 2005, just a year later? The only reason is that the DMK, more particularly her bete noire Kalaignar brought it for Tamil Nadu. This personal animosity has propelled her even to madly pursue the interests of Sri Lanka, more particularly, of Rajapaksa regime. Where are Vaikos, Nedumarans and Pandians?  r

Why the Uprising Day announced by Anna?

Dear brothers and sisters,
For how many years Tamils dreamt of Sethusamudram project? It was the dream of Tamil people for 150 years. Arignar Anna observed ‘Uprising Day’ for the project even when he was in power. Not only the DMK, people would not have forgotten that even the ADMK demanded the project in its election manifestoes of 2001 and 2004. They said they would press for and obtain the project from the government to be formed at the Centre. Now they themselves have filed an affidavit in the Supreme Court on 29.4.2013 that the project is not required.
Why? Even when MGR was the Chief Minster, a resolution was adopted in the Assembly on 10.5.1986 demanding the project.
Now I can only visualise the scene of Sethusamudram project inauguration function at Madurai on 2 July 2005 when the temple city was flooded with people from all over southern districts. The Then Union Minister for Shipping T.R.Baalu presided over the function Prime Minister Dr. Manmohan Singh inaugurated the works of the Project in the presence of me and Tmt. Sonia Gandhi. The then Governor of TN Surjit Singh Barnala participated as special guest and only representative of the state government. The then Union Ministers P. Chidambaram,  Dhayanidhi Maran, A. Raja, Anbumani Ramadoss, Mani Sankar Iyer and K.H.Muniyappa and leaders of political parties in TN the then President of TNCC G.K.Vasan, MP, Dr. Ramadoss, Vaiko, N. Varadharajan, D.Pandian and K.M. Khader Moideen MP also participated in the function and spoke.
It is my duty now to recall the speeches delivered by them in that function.
In his speech Prime Minister Manmohan Singh said the Sethusamudram project was one of the most ambitious projects to be conceived in the Indian port sector. It will reduce the travel time between the east and the west coasts of India and will particularly benefit small fishermen.
“I am certain the people of this region will, in a few years, see their lives transformed for the better by this project,” he said. Dr Singh, however, urged project authorities to be mindful and respectful of nature and the maritime environment of the channel. “I am sure they will certainly do. We will make all efforts to preserve our natural heritage while implementing this project so that everyone’s livelihood is protected. We will also protect the livelihood of fishermen,” Dr Singh said.
In the 10th Five Year Plan, the Centre has set new and higher targets for improving the country’s ports. “We want to encourage new investment in port development through a partnership between the public and private sectors. We welcome all forms of investment, public and private, in our ports. Over the next few years, we expect to see a major transformation of all our ports, large and small, for shipping or fishing,” he said.
Now ships from the east to the west coast and vice-versa sail around Sri Lanka as there is a submerged reef - Adam’s Bridge - near Rameswaram between the south-eastern coast of India and Thalaimanar in Sri Lanka. However, the channel will save a distance of up to 424 nautical miles (about 785 km) and 30 hours of sailing time. The Centre estimates foreign exchange savings of up to Rs 215 crore in the first year of operation (2008-09).
It is estimated to cost Rs 2,427.40 crore, consisting of a capital cost of Rs 2,233 crore and a financing cost of Rs 194.40 crore. Of this, Rs 971 crore will be equity whereas Rs 1,456 crore will be debt portion. The Government of India’s contribution in the equity will be Rs 495 crore, whereas Port Trusts of Tuticorin, Chennai, Ennore, Visakhapatnam, Paradip, Shipping Corporation of India and Dredging Corporation of India.
“A dream formed 150 years back has now become a reality. I congratulate our respected leaders Kalaignar and Sonia Gandhi for realising this dream. Speaking earlier Kalaignar Karunanidhi wanted a world standard motor vehicle testing centre in Chennai. I am very happy to announce here that we have decided to establish a motor vehicle testing centre in international standards at Oragadam near Chennai”, the Prime Minister said.
In her speech Tmt. Sonia Gandhi said “A 150 year old dream is becoming a reality today. Although the Sethusamudram project was spoken all these years, nothing was done to implement it. Today, the UPA government has firmly taken step to realise this technically challenging project having economic importance. As this great project is establishing a continuous sea route within Indian waters this has great importance at the national and regional levels and for the defence of the nation. Tamil Nadu, particularly southern district will be greatly benefited by this project and the economy and sea trade of Tamil Nadu will greatly improve”.
Union Minister P. Chidambaram said, “The UPA government took charge on May 22, 2004 and within six weeks the Prime Minister and the Cabinet approved this project and in the very first budget on July 8, 2004  the Centre announced that this project would be implemented. It is not even one year since the announcement we lay foundation stone for this great project on July 2, 2005. This project will be implemented at a cost of Rs.2,427 crore. The Centre has given security for the loan to be taken for this project. Hence this project will be completed within the stipulated time and expenditure”.
MDMK General Secretary Vaiko in his speech said, “it is most fitting that this festival is being conducted in the same month of July when in 1967, Anna observed ‘Uprising Day’ saying “Let Sethu canal be created, and rich Tamil Nadu prosper” (nrJ fhšthŒ mika£L«, brªjäœehL brê¡f£L«). This is a project for which Naam Tamilar Iyakkam leader S.P.Adityan and Congress’s K.T.Kosalram raised voice. This is a project for which my dear elder brother Kalaignar beat drum in the Assembly in 1958 itself. A project for which Anna in the same Assembly gave a clarion call why the Centre was delaying implementation of the report of Dr. Ramaswamy Mudaliar Committee report. Due to the pressure of Perunthalaivar Kamarajar, Pandit Nehru announced the project on September 12,1963. A project that the then Prime Minister Vajpayee  announced that the Centre would implement at the Thanthai Periyar, Arignar Anna birth anniversary  Renaissance Rally on September 15,1998. For 24 years raising voice in parliament to the full of my energy, and because of the effort of my dear elder brother Kalaignar in 2004 when Dr. Manmohan Singh and Pranab Mukherjee took up the task of drafting the CMP they were told to include this project and they accepted and included this project. This day when it is inaugurated is a happy occasion. The name of Dr. Manmohan Singh who has allocated Rs.2427 crore for this canal of Tamils which will be renown like Panama canal and Suez canal, will find place on inscriptions of time”.
The then Union Minster Anbumani Ramadoss said ‘All Tamil hearts were yearning for this day. This day is a very important day. In history this is a very important day for all Tamils. More than that our leader of Tamil Nadu very much strove for getting this project for TN that dream is becoming real today. In the last one year the UPA government has been doing lot of achievements for TN and the most important of them is this project.”
The then TNCC President and now Union Minister G.K.Vasan said,” The UPA government led by the Congress is today implementing the long time dream of Tamils Sethusamudram project. This is a glory for TN. This project is a basic project that will make TN as the first state in the coming years. I would like to thank Kalaignar who effectively raised voice for that and Prime Minister and leaders of parties.”
The former State Secretary of the CPM N. Varadharajan said “I convey my greetings to this function. This is a time when people of India are fighting against poverty. The works of this project should be useful for that struggle. This project must be developed into one creating employment opportunities. All should cooperate for the implementation of a good project.”
Speaking on behalf of the CPI D. Pandian said ”This is a good festive day. A good day when a project lying stagnant is inaugurated. A day when the child conceived in the womb for 145 years is born. Although it is canal that will be dug today it will stimulate economic change and development  of this TN and help develop the economy of India. It will reduce the time of ships coming around. Hence this is a good news for the country. Some think that if they close their eyes world will turn dark. But here the function is being held in an excellent manner.”
Speaking at the function I said, “This is a good day, the day when the uprising of ‘Uprising Day’ won. When Anna assumed charge as Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu in 1967 and observed ‘Uprising Day’ declaring that we would never, at any time, for any reason give up rights and argue for the rights with those who were in places of granting them and spoke in the meetings arguing for Tuticorin port, Neyveli second mine cut, Salem Steel plant and Sethusamudram project, in fact whether this project would be realised was a question mark.
“We are inaugurating Sethusamudram project today as a symbol and dimension to show that by bringing together many parties with this alliance not only parties but also seas could be linked. Our Finance Minister P. Chidambaram has briefly explained the benefits of this project. Sethusamudram project is to create a sea route on Indian waters by linking Mannar Bay and Bay of Bengal via Adams bridge. As a whole this project will be a source for developing industrial resources not only for the districts of Ramanathapuram, Sivaganga, Tuticorin, Pudukottai, Nagapattinam and Virudhunagar but also of the whole country”.
Some elements then filed a petition in the Madras High Court to prevent this inaugural function. Dismissing that petition the Bench presided over by the Chief Justice said, “The petitioner has rushed to the court with a petition to prevent Sethusamudram project brought in national interest. It is everybody’s knowledge that this project will be beneficial to the country, because now ships have to go round Sri Lanka to come to Bay of Bengal. If a shipping canal is formed across Palk straits it will facilitate saving of money and time. This project will create good results and hence no stay for the function”.
Should not Tamil Nadu understand the effort to somehow scrap the project telling some religious reasons overlooking all these and after people’s tax money of Rs.829 crore spent for the project? Is it proper to prevent the project even after knowing that TN will be greatly benefitted and particularly lakhs of youth will get employment opportunities? Those in power in the state will only think to somehow get such projects and implement it for the benefit of people, but will they approach the court on behalf of the government itself and say the project acquire with great efforts was not necessary? The DMK has the duty to make people of Tamil Nadu understand all these. It is only to fulfill that that the DMK headquarters has decided to observe 15.5.2013 as ‘Uprising Day’ throughout the state to press for continuing the implementation of the Sethusamudram project on 15.5.2013, Wednesday. As ever, I request you all DMK brothers and sisters, as one among those who strove very much for the project to conduct these meetings in a grand manner.
Affectionately yours,
M.K.

Let's work for the success of Uprising Day

Flaying Jayalalitha regime for opposing Sethusamudram project, DMK President Kalaignar said that the DMK, although an opposition party, had announced ‘Uprising Day’ public meetings all over Tamil Nadu on 15th only to explain the necessity of the project to the people and called upon Party units at all levels to work for the success of the day.
In the fourth in series of his epistles to the cadre on May 7, Kalaignar gave further evidence provided by the US space agency NASA which stated,
“NASA had issued the following disclaimer when it was brought to their notice that certain statements were attributed to them – “The image may be ours, but their interpretation is not certainly ours……..Remote sensing images or photographs from orbit cannot provide direct information about the origin or age of a chain of islands, and certainly cannot determine whether humans were involved in producing any of the pattern seen”.
Hence, the truth is that there are no basis or evidence for the existence of any manmade bridge there either scientifically or deep sea chemical analysis.
Dr. Annamalai Mahizhnan of Australia has written in his essay that ‘Ramar bridge a fictitious  story”.
When a debate was held on Sethusamudram project at the behest of Union government, Sethusamudram Canal Project Managing Director N.K.Raghupathi, IAS said that it was explained with appropriate documents in the presence of Union Minister, officials of the department and representatives of religious bodies that there were no evidence whatsoever for a manmade bridge at the site of the project through scientific and technological studies of various private and government institutions. The group of representatives headed by Hindu Dharma Acharya Sabha secretary Swami Paramananda Saraswathi conveyed satisfaction over the explanation given by officials. Moreover, they told media persons that they extend support to the economic progress of the region.
Tuticorin Port Trust Chairman Raghupathi said “Like the Suez canal connecting Red sea and Mediterranean sea, Panama canal connecting Pacific and Atlantic oceans and Kiel canal connecting North sea Baltic sea, the Sethusamudram project by connecting Mannar Bay and Palk straits through a canal creating shipping of large vessels will definitely create industrial and trade development and economic progress in Tamil Nadu. This is a rare gift to Tamil Nadu.”
From this, it is clear that the justness of the project is observed by those thinking neutrally and it will never be observed by those who work with the intention of preventing it.
Panama cana and Suez canal are two canal cutting across land for shipping, but Sethu canal is entirely different. Panama canal was dug on land between North and South American continents and Suez canal dug on land between Egypt and Europe. But Sethusamudram project is one planned for shipping by deepening rocks called Adams bridge by 40 feet near Pamban in the sea area entirely belonging to India.
Even before DMK came to power in TN, Arignar Anna delivered a lengthy speech in TN Assembly on Third Five Year Plan on 9.10.1960, in which he referred to Sethusamudram project in the following:-
“What we must firmly ask the Centre what are the projects they are going to implement for the state? They must be categorically asked whether they are going to implement Sethusamudram project and Tuticorin expansion project or not? Now I earnestly ask the Minister. Your ability is well known to the people of the state. Only from the success you achieve in this, the people have to determine your ability hereafter. To study this and give report the Government of India appointed the best intellectual of our state Thiru. Ramaswamy Mudaliar. Keeping his study report and the controversy over figures of ten crore or fifteen crore we don’t know whether it could be added to the Third Five Year Plan. I once again ask this Ministry of TN. This government should courageously ask the Centre whether they are going to implement this project or whether we leave from this”.
Anna had spoken about this project like this even 50 years back in 1960. This project was pressed for in the resolutions of the DMK conferences in Tirupparankundram in 1961 and Virugambakkan in 1966. Only after the DMK came to power in 1967 the ‘Uprising Day’ was observed and Anna pressed for this project and Tuticorin deep sea port in the Assembly.
When the works of Tuticorin deep sea project slackened and efforts were made t0 convert it into a fishing harbour, Anna and me as PWD Minister went to the place where the then Union Shipping Minister V.K.R.V.Rao  was staying and met him. Anna took along with him the former Chief Minister M.Bhakathvatchalam and former Industries Minister R.Venkataraman, gave the assurance that if the port were to meet losses it would be borne by the State government and thus stove for the advent of Tuticorin deep sea port.
In 1972, the then Prime Minister Indira Gandhi unveiled the statue of ‘Kappaloattiya Tamilan’ VOC at the entrance of Tuticorin port at a function presided over by me. Then I spoke that Sethu canal project was absolutely essential for the benefit of Tuticorin port to develop further.
In the election manifesto of the DMK for 2004 Parliament elections also, we had pointed out that ‘we would urge the Centre to allot appropriate fund for beginning implementation of Sethu canal project which remains at the promise level for long.” Like us the ADMK election manifesto also then pressed for the necessity of the project.
Sethusamudram project is a Rs.2,427 crore project, of which the investment of the government is Rs.495 crore, Shipping Corporation of India Rs.50 crore, Tuticorin port trust Rs.50 crore, Dredging Corporation of India Rs.30 crore, Ennore port Rs.30 crore, Paradeep port Rs.30 crore, Chennai port Rs.30 crore, Visakapattinam port Rs 30crore, Public share Rs.226 crore and loans guaranteed by GoI Rs. 2,456 crore and totally Rs.2,427 crore. Of these, the works for Rs. 800 crore had already been completed.
The Union Cabinet Committee for Economic Affairs had approved this project. This committee headed by the Prime Minster had Ministers Pranab Mukherjee, P.Chidambaram, Sharad Pawar, Lalu Prasad Yadav, T.R,Baalu, Dhayanidhi Maran, Kamal Nath and Mani Shankar Aiyar as members.
 Through this project employment of eight crore man days per annum would be created and a lot of direct and indirect employment opportunities would also be created. Through the development of Rameswaram and Nagapattinam ports 10,000 persons would get direct employment. 11 persons would get employment with the handling of every ton of goods. All questions raised by environmental activists had been answered and additional tests regarding environmental impact were carried out at an expense of Rs.3 crore. Once completed the project will fetch operational profit from the first year onwards and will be directly profitable.
All studies carried out since 1955 have proved this project as technologically possible and nobody had even iota of doubt about it.
Will this project affect coral reef rocks?
No deepening work will be carried out in areas other than Adams bridge in Bay of Mannar. The area between Tuticorin and Pamban island had been declared as Marine Life National Park. The areas up to 10 km from this park has been declared as Mannar Bay Marine Life Sanctuary by Tamil Nadu government. Coral leaf rocks are found only in the depth less areas around these 21 islands. It is undeniable that there are no coral reefs either in the sea route to be formed or in Adams bridge. As according to Indian Sea Trade Act and international laws effluents from the ships sailing via this route will not be permitted there is absolutely no chance of effluents particularly oil leaks affecting coral reefs.
The infrastructure to be developed on land have been proposed to be established on 12.5 acre land in Dhanushkodi area and 2.5 acre land in Kodiakkarai area. Attempts are being made to use only land belonging to the state government. Hence there is no chance of fishermen getting displaced. If some fishermen were living on government lands the government will entirely bear the expense for their resettlement, Kalaignar said adding that the ADMK government had filed an affidavit in the Supreme Court that this excellent project should not be continued.

“Revive 35 welfare boards for unorganised workers”

Recalling the establishment of 35 welfare boards for different sections of unorganised workers and assistance provided to lakhs of them during DMK rules, DMK President and former Chief Minister Kalaignar M.Karunanidhi expected and wished that the present Chief Minister should read out statement under 110 in the Assembly on the occasion of May Day for the revival of those 35 welfare boards and help unorganised workers.
In his epistle to Party cadre on April 30, Kalaignar said that the workers of TN would not have forgotten the DMK rules starting 35 welfare boards for unorganised workers, enrolling them as members providing many welfare assistances thus protecting them and their families. Whenever any section of workers demanded such board they were conceded and boards were formed. On the request of their unions membership cards were delivered to workers through those unions.
Consultative committees were formed and representatives of all trade unions found place in them. But now under ADMK regime, those consultative committees were not renewed and just because the welfare boards were established during DMK rule they had been made dysfunctional and paralysed. Now for membership enrolment, strict conditions such as they had to come in person, VAO should certify, open a bank account etc.,
Kalaignar briefly explained the assistances provided by different welfare boards during the DMK rule for the fifth time from 13.5.2006 to 19.4.2011.
In TN Construction workers welfare board, 10,59,969 workers were newly enrolled and families of 3,46,044 workers were given assistance of Rs.100,54,504. TN Physical labour welfare board started in 1999 with a membership of 4,49,938 workers provided Rs.67,33,07,113 for 2,87,724 families of workers. The ADMK regime linked 9 welfare boards including TN auto and taxi drivers welfare board with the above but the DMK government again converted them as individual boards and also created many more welfare boards and provided assistance.
In TN auto and taxi drivers welfare board of the 1,00,619 workers enrolled, families of 17,046 workers were provided assistance of Rs.3,92,11,633; in TN washing workers board 16,634 workers out of 34,182 members were paid Rs.3,14,60,732; Hair dressers welfare board had 25,397 workers and 9,332 families were provided with 2,08,89,826; In Tailors welfare board 4,42,288 had registered and 9,332 families provided with Rs.61,25,95,684; Handicraft workers board membership 82,061 and 29,065 families were provide with Rs.9,21,50,489; Palm tree workers welfare board membership 33,416 and 7,401 families provided with Rs.5,49,745; TN Handloom and Handloom silk weavers welfare board had membership of 1,80,116 and 1,09,185 families were given Rs.23,88,20,061; TN footwear leather products manufacturing and tannery workers board membership 11,225 and 3,061 of their families were paid Rs.89,59,583.
Similarly welfare boards for artists, goldsmiths, pottery, house servants, power loom workers, road side merchants, shops and establishments workers, cooks et al were formed and assistance was provided to their families. Cable TV workers welfare board was started on 28.3.2008.
Agricultural workers welfare board was started on 18.1.2007 and 1,74,65,498 workers were enrolled among whom the families of 8,72,981 workers were provided with assistance of Rs.684,02,55,686; TN Folk artist welfare board was started on 20.4.2007 and 25,192 artists were enrolled; up to 15.3.2011 4,869 families of artists were given Rs.66,31,567; TN Narikuravar welfare board started on 27.5.2008 with a membership of 9,762 and the families of 3,593 were paid Rs.1,97,11,000; village temple priests board was started on 22.4.2007 and 65,326 were enrolled and up to 15.3.2011 2,030 priests were paid Rs.63,25,045; the Differently abled welfare board started on 24.4.2007 and 52,000 were enrolled up to 15.3.2011, 3,632 were provided with Rs.1,62,478; TN Trans-genders welfare board was started on 10.4.2008 with a membership of 2,086 and 775 beneficiaries were provided with Rs. 3,83,880;
Welfare boards for tribals, ulamas, pudirai vannars and notified communities were started on different dates during this period of DMK rule and assistance were provided. In civic workers welfare board 43,351 were enrolled and up to 15.3.2011 1133 were paid Rs.17,86,440; Fishermen welfare board started on 29.6.2007 and enrolled 3,85,756 and up to 15.3.2011 5,060 families were given Rs.5,22,01,411.
So also welfare boards were started for film industry workers, sheep growers, Khadi spinners and weavers, publishers, book sellers and workers and document writers in the state.
Totally in 35 welfare boards for unorganised workers 2,13,55,884 members were enrolled and among whom 21,41,279 families of unorganised workers were provided with Rs.1,011,56,01,087 during DMK rule.
Now we do not know whether those welfare boards were functioning and assistances were paid. To discuss about all these a meeting of all trade unions was held on 23rd last at AITUC office in Chennai presided over by Com.S.S.Thyagarajan in which representatives of LPF, AITUC, CITU, BMS  and HMS participated. On behalf of LPF workers wing secretary Singara Rathnasabapathi participated.
They had come forward to conduct protest demonstration on behalf of 10 trade union condemning the anti-unorganised workers actions of the ADMK regime on 7.5.2013 at 10 am in front of all district collectors’ offices in Tamil Nadu, Kalaignar said asking all those belonging to the LPF to participate in it.

Don't go to the aid of Death sentence

Dear Nedumaran Aiya,
I read your article “Why Karunanidhi shows fury after losing power?” in ‘Junior Vikatan’ issue dated 28.4.2013. It will only be surprising if you write an article on any crisis without somehow bring in Kalaignar into it and attack him and not showing your personal enmity for him. Hence this is also your usual article.
However, as one who believes that death sentence should go away from this country and even the world, and with the right of my participation in the ‘Death sentence abolition campaign journey’ from Chennai to Kanyakumari fully under your leadership, and with the determination over that demand, I write this open letter to you.
Now humanitarian voices have started gaining strength against death sentence. Our aim should be to attract towards us even those with different opinion by telling them the fairness in the abolition of death sentence. Only uniting all, leaders and workers, on such common demands cutting across party lines will add strength to the demand.
But on anything like Eelam crisis, abolition of death sentence etc., the tendency of your articles is only disruption of the developing unanimous opinion and unity. Those who wish to take up common crises and struggle for the good of the society, should be broadminded and unbiased and carry all along with them.
But, functioning as if you are the unannounced Propaganda Secretary of the ADMK, have taken upon you as your life time politics attacking Kalaignar only as there are no principles whatsoever there (in the ADMK). I humbly request you not to make friends waiting on gallows as pawns for your personal politics.
The only question that you have raised in your article is why Kalaignar did not get remission of the sentence of the other three during his rule as he did for Nalini. Kalaignar had written reply for this in detail in ‘Murasoli’ on 31.8.2011. Now again he explained in ‘Murasoli’ on 14.4.2013. Those answers and explanations will definitely wake up those sleeping but it is difficult to wake up those who pretend to sleep.
Still, we can remind ourselves here the details about it.
(1)    Kalaignar is firm in his view that death sentence should be deleted from the law book itself. He has spoken and written about this many times. You have yourself quoted Kalaignar’s statement while speaking to reporters in the last week of October,1999 that “My opinion is that death sentence is not at all necessary. If remission of death sentence to life sentence is done, there are chances of the convicts realising their mistake and rectify themselves. This is also applicable to Rajiv assassination case”. Hence, it is confirmed that Kalaignar’s view is that death sentence is not necessary in any case including Rajiv assassination case.
(2)    Without holding that just as his opinion, it was Kalaignar who gave shape of implementation to that when he was in power. It was in that respect, that the remission of death sentence for Nalini into life sentence was effected. In 1970s itself, Kalaignar changed the death sentence of Pulavar Kaliyaperumal and saved his life. It was Kalaignar who reduced the death sentence of Com. Thyagu who is now functioning amongst us as a writer, orator and in-charge of a movement.
(3)    Why Kalaignar, who changed the death sentence of so many of them did not reduce the sentence of Peraarivalan, Santhan and Murugan, had been explained himself.
 That demand was raised in the circumstances of the Supreme Court on 8.10.1999 following which the High Court on25.11.1999 rejected their mercy petition within a few years of the assassination of Rajiv Gandhi. It was only seven or eight years since they were imprisoned and hence remission of their sentence might be considered hasty by the people. But in 2011, twenty years have been completed since their imprisonment. Remission of sentence for Nalini was then granted on the basis of her being a woman and mother of a child. Now, Kalaignar’s argument is that as they had already undergone life sentence, the Tamil Nadu Cabinet can meet and grant remission of their sentence and there are precedence during his rule.
Taking the above mentioned three arguments into account, it is a rare opportunity now to rally all in one front and save all standing on gallows in the cases of Rajiv Gandhi assassination and (forest brigand) Veerappan. Without using this opportunity, we should not commit betrayal to Tamils sentenced to death by placing articles of captious arguments preventing unanimous opinion.
Before I finish my letter, I have a matter to speak with you.
Always keep criticising the past of Kalaignar, have you ever dusted and see the past of you? Now pretending to be living only for Tamil nationalism, have you ever thought about the occasions when you stood against Tamil nationalism and Tamil language?
You might have forgotten. Still unforgettable certain thoughts of your past have to be reminded here.
Where were you when anti-Hindi agitation here was the burning issue in 1965? Chinnasamy who got himself immolated, Rajendran who bore bullets on his chest and those Tamils who consumed poison and died…so the list of martyrs then extend. On those days did you stand on their side or on the side of government which was the reason for their death? Ask your conscience once.
On November 30,1970, Kalaignar moved Tamil medium education bill. To know who was the ‘Tamil national leader’ who gathered students at Madurai on December10 and instigated them to agitate against Tamil medium education, turn the pages of history and see!
Ask your heart who affiliated Congress Party under the leadership of Indira Gandhi in support of Emergency opposed by Perunthalaivar Kamarajar, after his demise. Close your eyes and think over once as to who was the militant who fought against the atrocious Emergency and who was the ‘Gandhian’ who was in support of it.
The then ADMK government registered the black flag stir against Indira Gandhi at Madurai on 30 October 1977, as attempt to murder Indira Gandhi case. Who was then deposed as ‘Eye witness’ in the court and obtained two year imprisonment for your ‘life friend’ Vaiko?
You are also the son of Indira Gandhi and also friend of Vaiko against whom you deposed witness for attempting to murder her. It is in this situation that you say Kalaignar is staging dubious drama.
Nedumaran Aiya, I want to remind you only one thing. “T-he easiest in the world is to find fault with others. The most difficult in the world is self-realisation of one’s faults”.
Kindly give up your personal enmity for Kalaignar. Come forward to save Eelam people and those standing on gallows.

Widespread and unchecked sexual offences occur in State ruled by a woman: Kalaignar

Pointing out that the entire Delhi city was embroiling over reports of sexual offences and the Chief Minister of Kerala and Malayalees Associations were concerned over the gang rape of a seven year old child in Tirupur and extended support, DMK President Kalaignar regretted that widespread sexual offences were taking place unchecked in the State of Tamil Nadu ruled by a woman and the media in the state also underplayed them so as not to incur the displeasure of  the regime. 
In his epistle to Party cadre on April 28, Kalaignar said on the opening day of the second phase of the Budget session of Parliament on April 22, both Houses were paralysed by the Opposition parties raising the issues of the leak of JPC’s report on 2G spectrum allocation, irregularities in the allocation of coal blocks and the incident of rape of a five-year old child in Delhi and had to be adjourned.
All television news channels conducted heated debates on the nature of punishment to be imposed on the perpetrators of the horrendous crime on the 5-year old child. In December last, Parliament witnessed uproarious scenes on the rape of a medico in a bus in Delhi and the situation developed to the extent of women laying siege of Rashtrapathi Bhavan.
According to the information on the website of Tamil Nadu State Crime Records Bureau, contrary to 484 crimes of rape from January to September in 2011, there were 528 such instances during the same period in 2012, among which 75 instances were reported in Chennai.
Kalaignar said on learning the instance of 12-year old 7th standard girl Punitha subjected to sexual violence and strangulated to death near Srivaikundam in Tuticorin district in January last, he deputed DMK district secretary N.Periyasamy to meet the mother of the child to console her and offer financial assistance, he also sent Rajya Sabha member Kanimozhi to Tuticorin to console the family members. It was only after that the ADMK regime woke up and sent assistance through a minister.
Reports of poor women subjected to such atrocious sexual violence was pouring from all over India, particularly in Tamil Nadu in recent times. Severe punishment for those committing such crimes was solitary confinement for life for them. The State and Central governments should take a decision on this and put an end to sexual crimes.
But, as far as ADMK government was concerned, taking action on sexual crimes was only at the level of nominally registering a case in police stations.
But after Jayalalitha left for Kodanad on 1.1.2013 a lengthy statement in her name was released with the headline ’13-point plan to oppress crimes against women. As usual there were applauds and shining publicities for that announcement! There were reports exaggerating that the CM had turned Tamil Nadu into a state without sexual offences.
The first three of the 13-point plan announced by the CM, were administrative announcements about who would enquire and take action on cases of sexual violence- those pending and to happen in future. Fourth aspect was Goondas Act, which was already misused to the maximum extent by this regime. Next, they said they would take action to establish women’s fast-track courts in every district to enquire into cases of sexual violence. Another plan was to bear the medical expenses of women affected in sexual violence. What happened to these 13-point plan announced? Did these announcements also stop with letters as others, Kalaignar wondered.
Giving detailed account of the barbaric sexual violence committed on a five-year old child in Delhi, Kalaignar said 38,338 cases of sexual assaults on children had been registered in India from 1001 to 2011. When the case of rape of the child in Delhi was heatedly discussed up to Parliament, what is the situation in Tamil Nadu?
On April 12 last, when an eight-year old Malayali girl was alone in her house after returning from school, she was raped by a gang of four even as she was screaming. The mother of the girl Lalitha was living away from her husband Unnikrishnan working in Chennai. That child studying second standard in a private school used to attend ‘tuition’ till her mother returned from the industry where she was employed. But on that day school was over earlier and tuition was also cancelled. Hence the girl returned home and when she was about to take food one Kannan and three others entered into the house, raped and then also tortured her.
When her mother returned home and saw her daughter lying unconscious she had carried her to a nearby hospital. After the girl regained conciousness she had narrated the happenings after which a complaint was lodged in the police station. But in the beginning the police treated the issue lightly and only after the locals protested they had filed a case and arrested the four culprits. The four were working in a factory there and had threatened of dire consequences if they complained to the police.
Now the girl was undergoing treatment in Ganga Hospital in Coimbatore. The doctors of the hospital had told Kerala Chief Minister Oommen Chandy, when he enquired, that the girl was improving. The Kerala Chief Minister had spoken to the family members of the girl and assured them of all help. Moreover, associations of Malayalees had been consoling Lalitha who was still to recover from the shock on the condition of her daughter. In the meanwhile, as advised by Kerala CM, KPCC secretary C. Chandran came in person and enquired the girl’s relatives. He had also spoken to functionaries of Malayalee associations in Tamil Nadu.
Even after so many developments, it was height of pity that none of the ministers or local ruling party functionaries visited that child or console her mother or came forward to provide any assistance. When the Kerala Chief Minister was taking so many initiatives, the woman Chief Minister of TN did not even issue a statement about this. Instead, on April 23 she had brought pages of written reply on how the law and order situation was maintained ‘well’ and read it out for the debate on grants for police department in the Assembly.
“Not only the CM, while the dailies and media in Tamil Nadu were discussing over the Delhi incident for pages and for hours, why none of them was not even least concerned about Tirupur rape incident? Is it not because if they write about it or criticise on television they will have to incur the hatred of the CM in TN? When the Chief Minister of Kerala was directly intervening and pay attention because the raped was a Malayali child, is it proper for Tamil Nadu Chief Minster to ignore it?” Kalaignar asked.
One of the leader of the CPI Tirupur K.Subbarayan had demanded that justice should be rendered to the family of the affected girl and for the punishment for the culprits the State government should take suitable action, Kalaignar said adding instead of placing the demand to the State government, if Subbarayan just informed the state secretary of his party D.Pandian, a way for getting relief for the child will be created.
Not only in Tirupur, in the first week of this month SSLC student Nadhiya of Palakombai village near Andipatti in Theni district was raped and murdered. “Do the government here pay attention to all these? The Assembly session was going on and is there any chance to speak about these matters at least there?” Kalaignar asked.

DMK to move SC against Jaya in nomination case

DMK President Kalaignar M Karunanidhi on April 27 announced that Party’s Nagapattinam MP A K S Vijayan would move the Supreme Court challenging the Madras High Court order setting aside a petition, challenging the nominations filed by Jayalalitha in the run up to the 2001 Assembly polls in Tamil Nadu.
In a statement, Kalaignar said the Division Bench comprising Justice Elipi Dharmarao and Justice R Mala had on April 25 set aside Mr Vijayan’s miscellaneous plea on the ground that former DMK MP C Kuppusamy, who had filed the writ petition, had died.
The Bench had also observed that Vijayan could not implead himself as a party in the writ petition and pursue the case in place of the deceased petitioner. He said Vijayan was one among the DMK leaders who had approached the Election Commission (EC) in August 2001 seeking to prosecute the ADMK leader for filing nominations from four seats.
Since the EC had not taken any action, Kuppusamy had filed a writ petition in the Madras High Court on March eight, 2002, seeking a direction to the EC to initiate appropriate action by launching criminal prosecution against Jayalalitha for filing nominations from four constituencies, he noted.
After hearing the arguments, the Bench had reserved the orders on March six this year. In the meantime, Kuppusamy passed away on April 19 and Vijayan filed a petition seeking to implead himself as party in the case in place of Kuppusamy to pursue the case.
However, the Bench dismissed Vijayan’s impleading petition on April 25. Reacting to this, Kalaignar said the general rule was that the offence could not be erased if the petitioner, who had moved the Court against the offence, had died.
Observing that the Supreme Court had passed orders on earlier occasions that a PIL should be not dismissed on the ground that the petitioner had died, Kalaignar said citing these two legal points, Vijayan would file an appeal in the Apex Court challenging the Madras High Court order setting aside his miscellaneous plea. “Vijayan will initiate necessary steps to move the Supreme Court in this regard”, Kalaignar said.
He said there was precedence that a litigation cannot be dismissed in the wake of the petitioner’s death and based on this, steps will be taken to file an appeal in the Supreme Court by Vijayan.
Kalaignar recalled that Kuppusamy and Vijayan besides some others had appealed to the Election Commission of India in 2001 against Jayalalitha, contending that providing false information was punishable offence.
Kuppusamy, Parliamentary party Leader in 2002, had filed a petition against Jayalalitha and since a senior member of the party had filed the case, Vijayan did not file any separate litigation, Kalaignar said.
Kalaignar said Jayalalitha filed nominations from four constituencies in 2001 and had given a declaration that she had not been or would be nominated as a candidate for more than two constituencies.
In November last, the Supreme Court had set aside a 2007 direction of the Madras High Court asking authorities to initiate action against Jayalalitha and referred the matter back to the High Court for fresh disposal.

“Retrieve land areas of Tamils from Sinhala army occupation”

DMK President and TESO Chairman Kalaignar M.Karunanidhi urged India and nations of the world and the UNO to immediately intervene to retrieve lands belonging to Eelam Tamils from the encroachment and occupation of Sinhala army and take action to get the armed forces out of these areas where they had lived to enable them to live there forever.
In his epistle to DMK cadre on April 27, Kalaignar recalled his demand on April 23 that Government of India should take action to help 19 Eelam Tamils stranded in Dubai out of 45 who escaped from Lankan armed forces and tried to cross over to Australia but were caught and disembarked there and directed by the UNHCR to deport them back to Lanka as no other country came forward to give them asylum.
On reading his request Union Finance Minister P.Chidambaram had sent him the message that the Centre considered it and the 19 Eelam Tamils would not be repatriated back to Lanka. He had received similar information from those in Dubai, Kalaignar said and thanked the Centre and Finance Minister. However, he said he was duty bound to point out that the GoI was still passive in removing the difficulties of Eelam Tamils.
While replying to question in the Lok Sabha on April 22 regarding Tamil Nadu fishermen frequently attacked by Lankan naval forces, Union Defence Minister A.K.Antony had said that India had advised Lanka to direct their armed forces not to attack fishermen coming near international maritime boundary line and should be treated with humanitarianism and that India would continue to take steps to protect the interests of Indian fishermen.
The Defence Minister had further said that according to an agreement reached between both countries in October 2008, Lankan naval forces should not open fire on Indian fishing boats, and to prevent illegal activities in Indian waters and attacks on Indian fishermen fishing in our sea waters, ships of Indian Navy and Coast Guard had been deployed in Palk straits.
However, the incidents of attacks even after 2008 only proved that the Sinhala regime was not honouring this agreement also as it was accustomed to, Kalaignar said.
Only in view of all these that we had been telling that Commonwealth meets should not be held in Lanka. Even in the statement issued by me on 23rd last, I had referred to the demand of 27 Chief Justices of Commonwealth nations meeting at Cape Town in South Africa that the proposed CHOGM in Lanka should be reconsidered and decide on removing Lanka from Commonwealth organisation due to continuing violations of human rights. Following this DMK MPs were meeting envoys of Commonwealth nations and request them accordingly.
As if to add strength to our demand, Brad Adams, Asian director of Human Rights Watch had urged the meeting of Commonwealth Ministerial Action Group to be held in London to decide against holding Commonwealth conference in Lanka, which had not been respecting human rights by removing the Chief Justice from office, suppressing media, and denying basic liberty. If the CHOGM was conducted in such a nation it would amount to approval of human rights violations by Lankan regime. Commonwealth nations should register that its conference could not be held in a country which did not honour human rights.
As yet another instance for human rights violations by Lankan regime crossing limits, 6,381 acres of land belonging to Tamils had been illegally encroached by Sinhala armed forces. Right from 1990 when ‘Valigamam’ in Jaffna came under the control of Sinhala army this encroachment was taking place. After the end of war, when it was expected that these lands would be handed over back to Tamils now the Sinhala government had passed orders for the Sinhala army to own these lands.
It was not only in Jaffna area that such encroachment activities were carried out but also in the districts of Kilinochi, Mullaitheevu, Vavunia, Mannar, Tricaonamalee, Mattakalappu and Ambarai, Kalaignar said.
Moreover, the Lankan regime has planned to construct army headquarters for Jaffna zone in these land areas belonging to Tamils. It was reported that 2,500 temples and 400 churches where Tamils were worshipping were demolished and Sinhala places of worship were constructed, condemning which Tamils there were conducting peaceful protests.
Kalaignar recalled the resolutions already adopted at the conference of TESO in Chennai on 12.8.2012 which stated,
“Today in Sri Lanka the presence and power of the Army are more predominant than democratic system of Government. The Army has taken over a very large number of houses of the Tamils for their activities. The Army has brought vacant houses under its control and has been refusing to vacate. No social function could be held in the houses of Tamils in the North and East without the permission of the Army.
Only the Army men are appointed as District Administrators and Government functionaries there. Tamil Eezham today looks like an Army-Camp. There is no way out for the Tamils to air their grievances, talk or peacefully agitate in the absence of democratically-elected local bodies. They are under constant panic.
This Conference, therefore, pleads with the U.N.O. and Nations of the World, to bring pressure on the Sri Lankan Government to withdraw the Army from the Tamil Areas immediately. This Conference further requests the U.N.O., to constitute an International Committee to directly supervise withdrawal of the Army” and
“Sinhala-fishermen are being settled in the areas traditionally under occupation by the Tamil-fishermen in the coastal areas of the North and East. This has affected the livelihood of Tamil fishermen.
Sinhalese forcibly settled in Tamil areas should be sent back and Tamils should again be declared as the rightful owners of the natural resources, trade and commerce. This conference appeals that the U.N.O. should urge the Sri Lankan Government to take steps immediately to restore normalcy in the life of the Tamils.”
It was to defeat these designs of the Sinhala armed forces to encroach and occupy land areas belonging to Tamils that he had now urged the nations of the world including India and the UNO to intervene immediately and take actions, Kalaignar said.

Which is impressive - the seller or his ware?

This is my own loose translation of a popular Tamil proverb. Tamil proverbs are known as capsules of wisdom put in a poetic language. Poet Abdul Rehman has mentioned somewhere that each Tamil proverb is a poem in itself. What does this proverb convey?
When we go to a shop we are interested only in the merchandise; we look for quality and durability. Sometimes we look for elegance also. We are the least interested in the person who sells them. Yet, there are occasions when we are carried away by the eloquence of the seller and end up purchasing an article. Sometimes, the salesman is so persuasive that he makes us purchase an item which we did not have any idea of procuring. As they say, ‘sales talk’ always succeeds almost all over the world.
This is more so in the field of Indian politics. As far as I can remember, it is the person who counts in politics, rather than his philosophy. The philosophy may be a sound one, yet it becomes acceptable only when it is presented by an acceptable person.
India is known as a country of hero worshippers. It is always a person who has the qualities of a hero, personal charm, endearing manner and some amount of benevolence who manages to reach the top. In short, we want a father figure, in whose hands we will be safe and smug. Once we accept the person, we are prepared to accept his philosophy, whatever it is. It is like saying ‘he is a good person, we are safe in his hands, therefore whatever he does must be good for us.’
When Gandhi entered the Indian scene there was no dearth of intellectuals infused with patriotic fervour who were launching a fierce fight for freedom of India using parliamentary methods. Yet within a short while, Gandhi could become a pole star in the firmament of Indian politics by freely mixing with the masses, speaking their language and identifying himself with them. His generous mixture of religion and politics brought him nearer the masses and very soon he became ‘Mahatma’, an unsurpassed figure who could be equalled by no one. His writ started running in the whole of the country and anyone who questioned him did so at his own peril. There were occasions when Jawaharlal Nehru and Rajagopalachari disagreed with him, but they stopped their dissension with murmurs. Rajagopalachari became unpopular when he openly disagreed with the Mahatma in the question of partition. Netaji Subash Chandra Bose was completely overshadowed by Gandhi and had to change his scheme of action. Between Sardar Patel and Jawaharlal Nehru, the latter became the darling of the masses more easily because he was able to obtain Gandhi’s stamp of approval.
After Gandhi, Jawaharlal Nehru with his sincere love of the people and his ardent devotion to national development soon rose to become the father figure Indians wanted to find. A person of charming manners, he was soon to eclipse everyone around him. Even when he bypassed others using coarse methods, he was neither suspected nor chastised. When elections were held in 1952, there arose posters everywhere in India, showing a lifesized Nehru proclaiming, ‘I am the candidate in all the constituencies.’ Even the number of constituencies were mentioned. So, Congress party depended on Nehru’s charm for continuing in power and the strategy succeeded. During his lifetime, no party other than the Congress could capture power anywhere in India, but for a brief spell of Communist rule in Kerala.
After Nehru came Indira Gandhi, whose strength was yet to be proved, though she did wear her father’s mantle. Very soon she rose like a colossus, pouncing on her opponents like a wounded tigress and instantly disactivating them. Once having firmly seated herself in the saddle, she took every step to consolidate herself. She followed the policy of non alignment rather aggressively, showing to the imperialist forces that she was not the one to be taken lightly. On the international front, India stood firmly on the side of the aggrieved nations. She kept the Indian ocean area free from any power play. She created Bangladesh, cutting Pakistan to size. She generally helped the Tamil militants of Sri Lanka, thereby keeping that country in a state of scare. All these earned the admiration of her countrymen in abundance, if not their good will, and she came to be considered an iron lady, both in India and abroad.
At the home front, she was not that good to her own country, and trampled all the democratic institutions which had been built brick by brick since Independence. Her emergency and draconian measures that followed successfully created a fear psychosis among the people. Yet, there were people who admired her for the welfare measures she took during those dark days. If she earned the epithet of ‘annai’  it was not as a benign mother but as a stern disciplinarian. However, it is significant that she was able to resurrect herself after all the ignominy. It shows that, after all, people accepted her as a protective force, in whose hands the country would be safe. She might have continued to rule for long had she not been snatched away by cruel fate.
Morarji Desai, unfortunately, had to carry a stigma from the beginning. He was considered stubborn and unyielding qualities which would be unsuitable for a multiracial country like ours. He was also considered fascist and conservative. It was not a secret that he was nurturing prime ministerial ambitions. Jawaharlal Nehru was wary of him and tried every trick to keep him at bay. Yet, after having tasted Indira Gandhi’s devious rule, full of trickery and deceit, people came round to accepting Morarji Desai, known for integrity and straightforwardness. He suited the requirements of a father figure all right, but his government gave way under the weight of the ego of the constituents. Had he been given more time, he certainly would have won popular acclaim.
Rajiv Gandhi could not have filled the ‘father figure’ frame, yet he was clothed with a halo, that of being young and dynamic. Though he was guilty of hypocrisy and misdemenour, his followers, the set of sycophants that they were, presented him to people as no less than a saviour.
Even to begin with, prime ministership was thrust upon him, as it were, because he was the son of his mother. It is difficult to say, however how he would have conducted himself if he had lived longer.
(To continue)

Empty announcements: Everybody has right for day-dreaming!

Questioning the possibility of implementation of grandiloquent announcements made by Jayalalitha in the Assembly, whether they were properly discussed and designed, DMK President and former Chief Minister Kalaignar compared her inconsequential and empty announcements just for the sake of securing headlines in dailies on the next day to the story of Claudius, the glass merchant and the consequence of his daydream.
In his epistle to Party cadre on April 28, Kalaignar said DMK General Secretary Prof. K.Anbazhagan started his speech at the public meeting held at Tiruvanmiyur on 24th saying ‘Tamil Nadu and the hillarious comedy going on now’. Tamil Nadu Chief Minister Jayalalitha was proving everyday what he said. The proceedings of the Assembly as reported in dailies showed that it was conducted to the extent nobody had right to express opinion in the House against this regime. The Assembly is getting changed into a forum for singing in praise of the lady, convey gratitude for all announcements and everyone should bow heads and listen to whatever she read in the House.
So far there were so many Chief Ministers in Tamil Nadu but none of them did like the preset Chief Minister reading out announcements not pertaining to her departments but to those of other ministers. As the Chief Minister herself reads out all announcements under rule 110, leaders of other parties and the Speaker speak welcoming and applauding them. If anybody wants to point out any deficiencies in them, the Speaker will rule that there was no permission to criticise statement read out under rule 110, and if tried to speak in violation he will evict him from the House. Evicting like that four times, he will rule that the concerned member shall not attend the House for the whole session. It is such democracy that is ruling the roost everyday in Tamil Nadu Assembly.
On 25.4.2013 alone, the Chief Minister has read out all that has to be said by the Minister for Power. Then why a Minister for Electricity? Has he been assigned any other separate ‘duty’? will he attend to only that ‘duty’? How many announcements which are worth several thousand crores? Why those announcements were not made under the budget? Do not the funds to spent under those announcements require the consent of the Assembly? On if they were to be truly implemented, such concerns? Were they just announced for the sake of publication in dailies everyday? Will not the announcements of the CM discredit the value of demands for grants?
For instance I ask one thing. On 3.5.2012 last, Jayalalitha made some announcements relating to police department. Did not a debate on demand for grants for police department take place and the CM reply to it? She did; she read out for a long time to the debate on police department on 24.4.2012; made announcements. Still after 10 days on 3.5.2012 she made a very big announcement. Could not that been made during the reply for grants for police department? But it was not done. Why? If it was done then, it would have become one among the many. Is it because only if it is read separately under rule 110 it will come in a big way in dailies waiting to publish it on the first page and leaders of parties in the Assembly applaud ‘Amma’? Why we don’t know. What was the statement read out by the CM under rule 110 on 3.5.2012? Here it is:-
“Tamil Nadu Police Housing Board will take steps to construct own houses for those in the ranks from constables to deputy superintendents in the Police department and in the ranks from fire fighters to divisional officers in Fire and Retrieval department under ‘own your house’ scheme. Under this scheme 36,000 houses will be constructed. 10 acre land in every district headquarters and 100 acre land in Mela Kottaiyur village in Kancheepuram district will be allocated”. After the CM made this announcement under rule 110, beginning with C.K.Tamilarasan, U.Thaniyarasu of Kongu Tamilar Katchi, Dr.M.H.Jaswarihullah of Manitha Neya Makkal Katchi, M.Kalaiyarasu of PMK, A.Narayanan of Samathuva makkal Katchi, S.Vijayatharani of Congress, M.Arumugam of CPI and A.Soundararajan of CPM applauded and thanked the CM. Outdoing all of them, the then Speaker D.Jayakumar recited a poem in praise of their ‘Amma’.
It is one year since the CM made that announcement, and how many of those 36,000 houses have been constructed? Were those residential quarters for which police department staff remitted money constructed and opened? Did the CM visit and inaugurate? Or was it inaugurated through video-conferencing?
It was one such very big announcement the CM read out in the Assembly on 25.4.2013. for which very big first page headlines in newspapers.
*Hydel power project at a cost of Rs.7000 crore in Nilgiris district. * Rs.5000 crore plan buttressing electricity infrastructure and transmission network *19 new 400 KV sub-stations at a cost of Rs.3572 crore *sub-station and transmission corridor in Tiruvalam at a cost of Rs.1000 crore * Rs 30,602 crore plans for making TN power surplus state again!
The CM has read out power projects worth Rs.30,000 crore under rule 110 in the Assembly. But none of the leaders of parties in the Assembly asked any question whether those projects were feasible, whether they were discussed in the Cabinet or at least at the level of officials etc., Because according to the rule there is no permission to question.
This announcement was published in a very big way in all dailies in the state.
Till now there is power cut for over 15 hours a day in villages and children could not sleep in nights without air with the onset of summer. People are carrying their children and wander on streets. Industrial units in Coimbatore, Tirupur and Erode are closed and workers have lost means of livelihood. Are these rulers concerned about all these things? Yes, only because of her concern she had thought over for long to formulate these projects and announced.
These announcements of the CM under rule 110 can be printed as leaflets and distributed among women suffering due to power cut. The line that all these plans will take 8 to 10 years to be completed must be underlined. Meetings can be arranged to campaign that ‘the announcements made by the CM will be completed in ten years, and power cut will be relaxed then to make air available to you all and you can make your children sleep.’
From the already planned Kudankulam power project, whether power generation will begin, and how much of it will be available for TN are question marks. Because there is a stir going on against the project itself. First those protestors were instigated and later refused to even meet them. In an interview given to ‘Anandavikatan’ this week the leader of the protestors group R.Udayakumar has openly said about Jayalalitha first giving assurance to them and later gave up them.
At this stage only Jayalalitha has announced the plans in the Assembly. The 2000 MW hydel power plant in Nilgiris district at a cost of Rs.7000 crore to be implemented in two stages will take 8-10 years for completion; a plan is said to have been evolved to butress power infrastructure and transmission corridor at an estimate of Rs.5000 crore, works for setting up 14 new sub-stations of 230 KV each at an estimate of Rs.822 crore will be taken up; the works for setting up 400 KV sub-station and transmission corridor at Tiruvalam at an estimate of Rs.1000 crore will begin this year. (If so, nobody should ask, in which year the other plans will begin because the CM has said under rule 110) Work for establishing a corridor from Kayatharu to Chennai at a cost of Rs.2300 crore is said to be undertaken; works for establishing sub-stations at a cost of 1230 crore will be started; a sub-station at a cost of Rs.150 crore will be set up in Kanarpatti in Tirunelveli district; the works for 11 new 33 KV sub-stations will begin this year and totally it is said 56 sub-stations will be established at an estimate of Rs.8000 crore. They say that investment subsidy of Rs.20,000 will be paid to those who set up solar power plants on the roofs of their houses. Nobody should laugh at the final announcement. Yes. They have said that they will provide 11 lakh new power connections this year! How are the announcements? When the total provision of the budget of an year is about Rs.One lakh crore, if the Chief Minister is announcing plans for Rs. 30,000 crore under rule 110 on a single day, it is like the saying in villages, “nkiy¡nf thœ¡if¥gl¥ ngh»nw‹; fG¤nj R«kh ÏU”.
In the story for children in textbooks, a glass merchant Claudius was going on the streets selling glass wares. Unable to bear with hot sun, he kept the basket containing glass wares down under the shade of a tree, lied down and slept. A dream in his sleep. The glass merchant sells his wares getting lot of profit and slowly rises up as a rich man. He becomes a big industrialist and developed in status. When his servant came and said something, he gets angry and kicks at his servant. Thinking that he was kicking at his servant, the merchant actually kicks towards the basket containing glass wares and all those glass wares get smashed. That is the story. Similarly, everybody has the right to daydream, isn’t it?

An Editorial Faux pas!

The Tamil daily ‘Daily Thanthi’ found by late S.B.Aditanar has a tradition of inculcating the habit of reading dailies among common people including rickshaw pullers of those days. India’s first Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru had appreciated the yeoman service of the daily in enlightening masses on day-to-day developments. But unfortunately, while with the increase in literacy rate among people and with the advent of television news channels, the understanding and knowledge of even unlettered lay men had improved a lot, this daily assiduously maintain the same standard with which it was launched nearly six decades back; but nosedived in over-zealously pleasing the powers that be.
It was in that hyper enthusiasm that the daily has published an editorial itself hailing the anti-democratic practice of the present Chief Minister bypassing legislative debates, collective responsibility and all canons of parliamentary democracy and announcing everything including budgetary provisions under rule 110 of the House in order to avoid healthy debate and allow only applauds by minions and for cheap publicity.
The dailies, at least through editorials, have a duty to inform true opinions without fear for anybody if the rulers or the opposition parties committed mistakes. Dailies affiliated to political parties might differ in this respect. But is it fair for a neutral daily to exaggerate and hail something which had to be categorically castigated just to please the rulers and getting favours from them? Are they doing justice to their readers?
The editorial of the daily says immediately after the Speaker announces that the CM will release statement under rule 110, there is excitement among MLAs and journalists! There is political criticism for the CM reading out statements relating to other departments. But as the CM announces there will be caution and care at the level of officials, says the editorial. Does the daily mean that officials will not care if other ministers announced?
The daily applauds the CM reading out power plans for Rs.20,000 crore as ‘an announcement giving confidence’. But the CM herself had read out that those plans will give benefit after 10 years, so what is the remedy for the present power cut problem? Are not these announcements like saying a hungry man that he will get food after 10 years? Announcements under rule 110 cannot be criticised but only hailed. Does not ‘Daily Thanthi’ know this? Of course it knows well.
Then what is the reason for the daily to stoop so low? Even for the demise of Sivanthi Adityan who developed the daily to this level, the Chief Minister residing on the same road did not come in person to pay tribute. Still what is the reason for writing editorial like this praising 110 rule? Is it their fate?

Tughlaq Durbar!

In his epistle on April 28, Kalaignar pointed out that the daily of the ruling party had published on its first page in bold letters about the power projects announced by Jayalalitha under rule 110 in the Assembly on 25th as “Rs.30,602 crore plan to convert TN into a power surplus state” and this amount varied in every daily and asked what was true?
As if to concede what Kalaignar had written was correct, Jayalalitha again read out yet another statement under rule 110 in the Assembly on 30th stating, “The total estimate of plans announced by me in the Assembly under rule 110 had been published differently in various dailies. Hence in order that people of TN correctly know what is the total estimated amount I inform details” and read out the amount for each plan.
It implies that even newspapers cannot properly understand statements read out by the CM under rule 110 and prepared by some ministers and officials. The second statement read out by her makes clear that the ruling party daily’s report of Rs.30,000 crore worth plans was wrong  and the truth is only plans for Rs.16,350 crore. A statement under rule 110 for the Chief Minister to announce a plan and another statement under rule 110 to give clarification for the earlier one. Is this not looking like ‘Tughlaq durbar’? Only her apologist ‘Tughlaq’ say!

Humbug of the “Sage”!

That the Tamil Nadu Legislative Assembly has been reduced like ADMK General Council meeting where the minions sing paeans for their chief and the chief in turn can get away with whatever she bluffs was more than enough proved on record on April 23 when Ch(eap)ief Minister Jayalalitha justified the filing of defamation cases against leaders of opposition parties and media and delivered a lecture on behaviour in public life.
More than anybody else, the ADMK ministers and legislators would have been taken aghast by her sermons: “In public life, one should naturally behave in a restrained and disciplined manner. If one does not possess these qualities, the cases are filed to ensure they behave in a proper manner….Those who are in public life and those who lead political parties must avoid tongue-lashing. They must be careful about what they speak. If they speak in an unrestrained manner, then they have to face defamation charges”.
Jayalalitha has further said when derogatory remarks were made against her or against her Cabinet members, they could not be dismissed as allegations against an individual. “The AIADMK headed by me has 1.5 crore members. All the 7.28 crore people in Tamil Nadu have faith in me”.
Then came the climax of her ‘sermons’: Jayalalitha said she was in politics like a sage who had no attachment to fruits of her office, as crores of people reposed faith in her and her government.
The ADMK ministers and legislators would have been flabbergasted at their Amma’s sermons on restrained and disciplined behaviour and avoiding tongue-lashing by those in public life, because if they were the norms, violation of which would invite defamation cases by the government, their leader would have never come out of prison on conviction and sentence in cases had only Kalaignar, during his rule, had wanted to file against her for her statements everyday when she was in the opposition.
It is not only now in the Assembly but also in a statement issued on 2.2.2009 that she blatantly lied that she was living like a sage without any attachment to fruits of office, as if she renounced kingdom like Buddha, Mahavir or Ilango Adigal and took up ascetic life like a monk.
Does she think people are fools like her minions in ADMK to believe or at least pretend to believe whatever she says about her. A sage means on who renounces everything earthly. How can a sage exist in politics?
The Tamil weekly in its issue dated 25.11.2009, Jayalalitha’s grandfather, grandmother and mother lived in a place called Melakottai on Bangalore- Mysore Road in a house which is now in a dilapidated condition (the photo graph of the house was also published). That was one of over 50 Iyengar families in that place and her grandfather was a priest in the temple of the pace. The name of her grandmother was Yadhukiri ammal. The village priest’s daughter Sandhya was an actress and her daughter Jayalalitha also took up the profession of her mother and when she was in dire straits during her career, MGR inducted her into politics.
When the ADMK was started in 1972, she was not in it and only after 10 years, on the recommendation of some because of her distress, she was inducted in the party by MGR. What were all the manoeuvres made by this woman, claiming to have no attachment for any office, to capture posts?
She was member of Nutritious Meals committee in 1982, Propaganda Secretary of the party in 1983, Rajya Sabha member in 1984. When MGR passed away in 1987, she split the ADMK to capture leadership. Even during his life time she sent letter in her handwriting to the then Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi complaining about MGR and telling that he was physically and mentally incapacitated and wanted the PM to remove him from the office of CM and appoint her in that office.
How did she ‘capture’ the leadership of ADMK? She used some leaders, whom she got rid of later, to forcefully enter into ADMK headquarters on Lloyds Road sieze minutes book on which they wrote that she was elected as the general secretary of the party and obtained signatures- it is another matter that none of signatories to it are in ADMK now. Using their resources and influence she captured party leadership and later eased them out.
She has so far not disputed the claim of Sasikala’s husband M.Natarajan claiming to have resorted to back-room manoeuvres to get the two factions of ADMK united and getting back the election symbol of two leaves. Now that Natarajan is also a persona non grata for her.
But for the sympathy wave following Rajiv Gandhi assassination, Jayalalitha would have never become the CM of the state in 1991 and in all possibilities she would have abandoned political life and settled down in Hyderabad.
This ‘sage’ without any attachment to material life, there was no property whatsoever in 1990. But the value of her assets shown on returns was Rs.1.89 crore in 1991, Rs.2.89 crore in 1992, Rs.5.82 crore in 1993, Rs.21 crore in 1994, Rs.38 crore in 1995 and Rs.66.45 crore as on 30.4.1996. Announcing that she would get only one rupee as salary for the office of CM, how did this ‘sage’ with no attachment to anything amassed wealth of Rs.66 crore in five years? That disproportionate assets case is on trial for 16 years now and why did this ‘sage’ if she was not guilty prolong the case for so many years castigated even by the Supreme Court saying, “You (Jayalalitha) are making mockery of judicial process. How long can you drag the proceeding”?
What all were this ‘sage’ using for her day-to-day life? 98 wrist watches, 398 pairs of foot wears, 914 silk sarees, luxury bus valued at Rs.32.40 lakhs and jewels of 86,26,41,228 and 294 varieties worth Rs.4.95 crore. Why did a ‘sage’ require so much luxury? When she was the CM in 1992-93 she celebrated her birth day in a grand manner. Without depositing to the government she deposited 89 bank drafts for Rs.Two crore and cash of Rs.15 lakhs into her personal account. Moreover she deposited foreign drafts worth Rs.3.12 crore into her personal account without knowing who had sent them.
Was it an act of a sage to adopt a 30-year old Sudhakaran as foster son and celebrating his wedding like that of a Prince spending a whopping sum of Rs.100 crore? Were they acts of a sage to acquire TANSI land of the government in Guindy industrial estate at very cheap price against rules, defending her action in the lower court as proper and not misuse of power, then telling the higher court that the signatures on the purchase deeds were not hers to save her skin and subsequently making a somersault and undertaking to return the land and surrender?
Are the posh bungalows in Poes Garden and Siruthavur and palatial mansion in Kodanad with fully air-conditioned and luxurious interiors, leaf huts (parnasalai) occupied by sages?
If she had no attachment to fruits of her office, why did she file nominations from four constituencies knowing pretty well that it was against electoral rules and that she was disqualified from contesting in election following conviction by the High Court in TANSI land case? Why did she misused the then Governor and unconstitutionally get sworn-in as CM after the elections when her nominations themselves were rejected, only to be unseated by the Supreme Court?
Is it not because of her avaricious dream of becoming the Prime Minister of the country that she had directed her party minions and apologists to project her as the future PM and propagate it? Was it not of that dream that she and her aide Sasikala looked for a house in Delhi in 1999 and then got dejected? 
Leave alone acts of political vengeance, there are so many recorded acts of personal vengeance of this ‘sage’ some of which are her long time family friend and auditor Rajasekaran gong into her Poes Garden residence hale and healthy and running out of it profusely bleeding on his face and all over the body and foisting a case against one Sridhar and getting imprisonment after she came to power in 1991 for him for contesting against her in Bargur Constituency after he was denied seat for Theni constituency in 1989 elections in spite of remitting a few lakhs. (the narcotic case against her former foster son is pending for judgment).
Jayalalitha should have temerity to lecture on restrained and disciplined behaviour and avoiding tongue-lashing by those in public life. If at all defamation cases have to be filed against any person in political arena of Tamil Nadu, it is only against Jayalalitha that hundreds of such cased can be filed. Has she ever spoken in a decent and cultured manner about any leader in her political life? She did not spare even her political mentor and senior leaders of her party when she tongue-lashed them in indecent epithets.
The epithet she used and still using for Kalaignar could not be published by dailies and periodicals maitaining some standards.
She questioned the loyalty of Sonia Gandhi to her husband, called her a foreigner and political half-bake. When Rajiv Gandhi was the PM she said he was irresponsible and went to sleep by 10pm. About P.V.Narasimha Rao, she said he was non-functional and had generation gap with her. She accused Governor Channa Reddy of misbehaving with her.
She accused late G.K.Moopanar of having a role in Rajiv Gandhi assassination, charged V.N.Janakiammal of murdering her husband MGR by poisoning buttermilk.
She said BJP leader L.K.ADvani suffered from selective amnesia, Vajpayee of failing to maintain neutrality, called Chandrababu Naidu as a fraudster and sending thieves from his state to TN, branded Communists of street pipe brawling clowns and inventors of tin to make hundis.
She said DMDK leader Vijayakanth was attending Assembly in drunken condition, called PMK leader Ramadoss as tree cutter, S.R.Balasubramaniam as empty asafoetida box and even blamed judges of higher courts speaking as they please and absudities and making needless observations, they had likes and dislikes etc.,
When a woman minister Valarmathi spoke in the Assembly in a distasteful and degenerated manner and ridiculously referred to the assassinated body of Rajiv Gandhi lying on the ground, Jayalalitha relished her speech.
Now Vijayakanth had told reporters that Kalaignar was magnanimous during his rule without filing defamation cases against her for all the obscene and derogatory statements she was issuing against him.
Jayalalitha speaks Vedanta telling those in public life and leading political parties should behave in a restrained and disciplined manner and avoid tong-lashing and if they did not these defamation cases were filed to bring them to order. But she allowed Nanjil Sampath of MDMK who was ‘renown’ for obscene and derogatory speeches to join ADMK and withdrew all defamation cases filed against him by her regime and also presented him an Innova car and made him deputy propaganda secretary of her party.
That is the motive of her regime filing defamation cases against opposition party leaders and functionaries and the media- either silence them or make them surrender to her.      r