Selective Sensitivity Defamation suit, Jaya’s tool then and now

 As in her previous two stints, Tamil Nadu Chief Minister Jayalalitha has once again turned to defamation suits to take on rivals and media critics, of course with a significant departure from her past stints – from indiscriminate to selective.

During her first regime between 1991-96 she and her minions were sensitive not to tolerate even remotely critical remarks and insinuations of not only political rivals and critical media but also persons holding very high offices – like Chief Election Commissioner T.N.Seshan, Prime Minister P.V.Narasimha Rao, Union Ministers P.Chidambaram, Arunachalam et al., Every media house was at the receiving end of facing ADMK regime’s defamation cases, Tamil magazine ‘Nakkeeran’ alone slapped with 146 cases. The Speaker of the Assembly summoned journalist K.P.Sunil and Murasoli Editor and Publisher S.Selvam, even passing arrest warrant against the former. The offices of dailies and magazines were attacked by goons of the ADMK causing extensive damages to property and death of an employee of one magazine. Lawyers like Shanmugasundaram and K.Vijayan were brutally attacked by henchmen of the ADMK.

During her second tenure from the year 2001 and 2006 also, Jayalalitha continued with her tirade against political rivals and media and used her tool of defamation cases indiscriminately. But after her party’s rout in the Lok Sabha Elections in 2004, she withdrew all these cases. But the sobriety did not last long and soon she was back to her game of witch hunting. During this tenure, her government filed a total of 343 defamation cases, 147 against the DMK, 87 against the MDMK, 14 against the Congress, seven against the PMK, three against the VCK, two each against CPI and BJP and one against the Janata Dal and nine against others. Of all the newspapers and journals, the sober daily ‘The Hindu’ alone faced 20 defamation cases and its office and residences of its news editor and a reporter were raided. Assembly Speaker K.Kalimuthu ordered the arrest of its editor and a reporter.

After Jayalalitha’s regimes of both times, the DMK government which followed withdrew the cases filed by her regime. However, during her present rule, Jayalalitha does not seem to be indiscriminate in filing defamation cases against political rivals and the media and is very very selective, so far. Possibly chastened by bad experiences during her previous regimes, the media – both print and electronic, by and large, are not at all critical of her misrule and pay encomiums to her as and when they got an opportunity. That may be a reason for her not to turn ire on the media so far, except filing defamation cases against biweekly ‘Nakkeeran’ for publishing a story suggesting her to be beef eater, ‘Junior Vikatan’ for publishing reports on her conducting a yagna in her Poes Garden residence, on a lady called Priya Mahalakshmi, claiming herself as the daughter of Jayalalitha and on Sasikala’s relative Ravanan meeting her in Kodanad estate palace and ‘India Today’ for an article suggesting K.A.Sengottaiyan was dropped from Ministry at the instance of Sasikala, who regained her hold in party and administration.

But suddenly there was a spate of defamation case against leaders of political parties and dailies and a journal for publishing their speeches or interviews. Defamation cases have been filed against DMK President Kalaignar and Murasoli, 2 cases against Party Treasurer Thalapathi M.K.Stalin and ‘Times of India’  and ‘Murasoli’, Leader of the Opposition in the Assembly and DMDK leader Vijayakanth and ‘The Hindu’ and PMK leader Dr.S. Ramadoss and ‘Ananda Vikatan’ – all for commenting on Jayalalitha’s sojourn for nearly two months at the Kodanad Estate palace in Nilgiris, when the state was facing grave crises like loss of Kuruvai crop in Cauvery delta districts due to non-opening of Mettur dam, cholera deaths in Chennai city and scandals in the appointments of workers for nutritious meal centres and Anganwadis.

During the last one year, Kalaignar has been levelling so many serious allegations against Jayalalitha and her government, for which there was no response at all from her or her ministers of the government.

• The very first acts of Jayalalitha after assuming office (viz) shifting of Secretariat complex and scrapping of Samacheer Kalvi drew resentment and criticism from the public, various political parties and social organisations. Her obstinacy on Samacheer Kalvi was broken ultimately by the Supreme Court and her perverse plan of converting the new Secretariat into a hospital hangs in balance in the courts.
• Kalaignar’s counter to Jayalalitha’s statement that the DMK government left a debt burden of Rs. one lakh crore, opposition to the moves on merger of Anna Universities of Technology and for monorail project instead of expanding Metro Rail.
• Kalaignar took a dig at the Jaya regime for the frequent transfers of IAS officers, condemned Minister Senthamizhan and ADMK MLA B.Valarmathi barging into Nungambakkam police station and forcibly taking away seven ADMK men detained by Deputy Commissioner R. Thirunavukkarasu, who was transferred the next day instead of taking actions against the Minister and MLA (14.6.2011)
• On power generation projects initiated during DMK rule and the failure of the previous ADMK regime to initiate even a single power project resulting in power shortage, Kalaignar has issued number of statements so far from June 17, 2011.
• Kalaignar asked Jayalalitha to behave in a manner befitting her position. He questioned Jayalalitha’s rationale behind shifting the Secretariat back to Fort St George.

“Jayalalitha, who has taken charge as Chief Minister for the third time, should at least now behave like a leader with maturity. It is not befitting of a Chief Minister to be adamant against the DMK,” he said. He also hit out at Jayalalitha for undoing a number of measures of his rule.

“A change in government can mean a change in policies. It does not mean a reversal of everything done by the previous government. The entire government is being uprooted on the whims of one person,” he said.

“She has become the Chief Minister for the third term. She should conduct herself in a mature manner. She may dislike me. But why act against all the decisions taken by my government in public interest? She is now using the flyovers and stayed in the Tamil Nadu house in Delhi built during my tenure,” Kalaignar said.

The focus of the government should be on improving the status of the people, instead of wasting its energy on carrying out an individual’s whims, he pointed out. The new government has a lot of tasks like implementing many welfare schemes and important works. “It is not proper for the post Jayalalitha is holding to adamantly reverse the decisions taken by the DMK rule,” the former Chief Minister said. Referring to the ADMK government’s decision to shift the secretariat back to Fort St. George, he said the new complex was built with people’s money. “It would be tantamount to insulting the people if the government unilaterally ignores the complex,” he said. Kalaignar said programmes and policies might change after a regime change but it is not necessary to reverse all the welfare schemes initiated by the previous government.

He said the new site belonged to the State government and all offices could be accommodated. But, the old Secretariat site belonged to the Union government and it would not be enough for meeting the growing requirements of the administration. The DMK leader recalled how Jayalalitha, in her previous term, had cited reasons for deciding to shift the Secretariat from Fort St. George. She had pointed out cracks on the Namakkal Kavignar building which houses offices of most of the government departments, built during the DMK rule in the 1970s. Now, she had decided to ignore the new complex and renovate the Namakkal Kavignar building for the sake of doing it.

Space constraints and hurdles caused by the Army which owns the Fort St. George property had prompted even the previous ADMK government to explore the possibility of constructing a new secretariat building, he pointed out. Jayalalitha herself had said in the past that the old secretariat buildings were not safe for the functioning of the government. After an abortive bid to set up a secretariat on the campus of the more-than-a-century-old Queen Mary’s College, she had even laid the foundation stone for a new complex at Kotturpuram, he said.

However, it was left to the DMK government to actually implement it — not at Kotturpuram, but on Mount Road.

• On June 30, Kalaignar questioned the motive behind announcement of an enquiry commission to probe ‘complaints’ on construction of New Secretariat complex and questioned the credentials of the person who had ordered the probe and the judge (S.Thangaraj) who had been appointed for the commission.
• The announcements of the revision of tax rates, hike in excise duty on IMFL and introduction of new medical insurance scheme by Chief Minister Jayalalitha amounted to violation of the privileges of Legislative Assembly, remarked DMK President Kalaignar M.Karunanidhi on July 12.

In his question-answer column in ‘Murasoli’, answering a question in this regard Kalaignar said that the Governor had already announced that the Budget of the State government would be presented in the Assembly at 10 AM on August 4 and it had been published in newspapers. According to the age old tradition followed in legislature, after the announcement of Assembly session important announcements of the government and changes in tax structures were not carried out. Doing so would tantamount to violation of the privilege of the House, Kalaignar pointed out.

But according to reports in newspapers today, the State government had made changes in tax structure to fetch revenue of Rs.3,900 crore which would come into force from today (12.7.2011). Moreover another announcement for fetching additional revenue of Rs.1,200 crore in the sale of liquor had also been made. The Chief Minister herself had announced starting of a new medical insurance scheme. All these acts amount to violation of the privilege of the Assembly. “In the regime of those who unilaterally shifted the very building of the Assembly without any permission, violation of House mattered nothing” Kalaignar remarked. During the DMK rule, this much of tax hike was not effected because people would suffer. But now after change of rule, taxation to the tune of Rs.3,900 crore was announced within two months. “This is an atrocity that people chose on their own” he added.

Kalaignar said in the earlier Medical Insurance scheme, the poor could receive treatment for 642 types of diseases but by including and changing the names of some diseases, the government has announced that poor can get treated for 950 diseases. Also spending Rs 4 lakh for 4 years as announced by the government will only benefit the insurance companies. He pointed out that Jayalalitha had criticized the DMK government scheme saying it only benefitted private hospitals and the insurance company. “But, she has now invited tenders from private insurance companies and she has also included private hospitals in the scheme.”

• In his epistle on July 1, 2011 Kalaignar exposed with evidence lying in glorification of Jayalalitha as ‘The savior of World Tamils’ by making USA impose economic embargo on Sri Lanka”, following the visit of US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and in a similar manner, when she was in power last time, a bogus claim was made that the UNO was to confer a honorary award for Jayalalitha,
• On July 27, 2011 Kalaignar slammed Jayalalitha’s habit of foisting false cases to wreck vengeance on those whom she disliked and listed such cases during her regimes.
• Kalaignar on August 6, termed the claim of ADMK government’s first budget as ‘tax free budget’ as double–distilled lie and contained nothing substantial.
• On more than one occasion Kalaignar released the list of beneficiaries of TNHB plots and houses under the CM’s discretionary powers during ADMK regimes.
• Pitying ADMK ministers, Kalaignar questioned Jayalalitha making major announcements of different departments using Rule No.110 of the Assembly.
• The Paramakudi police firing incident in September 11 bears testimony to how autocratic the ADMK government is.
• Addressing a public meeting in Tiruchi on October 15, 2011 Kalaignar termed Jayalalitha’s allegation that ‘Anna Arivalayam’ was constructed on grabbed land as a ‘big lie’ and laughable and displayed the property document registered in 1972.
• Exposing a major land scam of ADMK regime, Kalaignar on October 9 alleged that a precious piece of land worth about Rs.200 crore adjacent to Cathedral Road near US Consulate has been handed over to a bogus Agri Horticulture Society, honorary secretay of which was V.Krishnamurthy of ADMK.
• DMK President Kalaignar M Karunanidhi on Nov.1 questioned Chief Minister Jayalalitha's decision to skip the NDC meeting in Delhi after citing it as the reason for her inability to attend proceedings at a Bangalore court, hearing the wealth case against her.

"When the judge asked her if she would be able to attend the hearing that day (October 22), she had expressed her inability, citing this reason. But the fact was she did not attend the meeting and deputed finance minister O Pannerselvam, thereby violating the oath of truth she took at the time of her deposition," Kalaignar said.

• In a public meeting in Chennai on April 15, Kalaignar quoting from a report in a daily said, ““There is a commission policy for every department. The method of commission followed in highways department is a correct illustration for that. Participating in the tender if the work is taken, the first word that comes is 12.5 percent has to be given to the high command. Nobody including the one who asks it, knows who is this high command which contractor will question after being told of high command? Next 4 per cent for minister or district secretary who recommended for work. For entering into contract agreement, 0.75 per cent for Superintending Engineer and 0.05 per cent for his office, 0.50 per cent for chief engineer, Chennai, and 2 per cent for the person who took the minister or district secretary, have to be given. All these are payments to be made prior to starting the work. During the settlement of bill after completion of the work, 2 per cent for divisional engineer, 0.50 per cent for his office staff, 2 per cent for assistant divisional engineer, 2 per cent for assistant engineer and 0.5 per cent for quality control AE, As if  all these are not enough Income Tax recovery of 2 per cent, sales tax recovery of 2 per cent and deposit withheld 2.50 per cent. No receipts for all these, it should not be demanded and won’t be given even if demanded. As a whole out of 100 per cent estimate amount, 34.35 per cent goes on commission. Even if one or two of these is left out at least 30 per cent of the amount goes to commission. The biggest share is 12.5 per cent which goes in the name of high command!”
• In a statement on May 2, Kalaignar accused ADMK government for neglecting school education and thus affecting the future of students.
• In his epistle on May 5, Kalaignar listed contradictions of Jayalalitha on Lankan Tamils issue.
• On May 22, 2012, Kalaignar took a dig at Jayalalitha’s loathsome pomp, shameless sycophancy and advertisement blitzkrieg at the huge expenditure of tax money on the completion of one year of her regime. He said those who are in the know of affairs say there is 15 percent commission on Ad. charges of which 2 percent goes to ad agency and the remaining 13 percent to the ‘place where it should go’.
• Explaining the process of Planning Commission on approval of plan outlays for states, Kalaignar exposed Jayalalitha’s ignorance of planning process (June 7).
• On June 8, Kalaignar questioned the locus standi of Jayalalitha in demanding the resignation of P.Chidambaram in the backdrop of judgments on charges against her in the TANSI and Disproportionate Assets case.
• Kalaignar asked the government to clarify on monorail project, alleged that printing presses in Kerala, Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh given preference over those in TN for printing those text books, failure to issue bus passes to school students etc.,
• Asking what happened to the cases against Sasikala’s kin, Kalaignar on June 26, wondered why Jayalalitha had not reacted to the interview of M.Natarajan.
• Questioning Jayalalitha’s announcement of appointment of 1623 guest lecturers, Kalaignar on July 10 wondered how vacancies that will occur in 2014-15  can be filled now.
• Referring to a report of the government obliging caste Hindus and transferring Dalit nutritional workers near Srivilliputhur, Kalaignar condemned the ADMK regime’s action perpetuating untouchability.

Answering a question about the tendency of not allowing Dalits in Nutritious Meals service, Kalaignar said people of other castes refused to send their wards to Kammapatti Panchayat Union school, Srivilliputhur because Dalit women were cooking nutritious meals. Still atrocious was bowing to the opposition of other caste people, the authorities had accepted to transfer from there Dalit workers Maragathavalli and Veeralakshmi from that centre. The act of the ADMK regime perpetuating untouchability is highly reprehensible.

• Citing media reports and the complaint sent to Jayalalitha by a former ADMK trade union secretary alleging rampant corruption in the direct appointment of 600 junior engineers in Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, Kalaignar charged of corruption in every department and the administration itself remaining paralysed under ADMK regime.
• Kalaignar decried her announcement of the merger of four Anna Universities of Technology with one affiliating university as retrogressive.
• On July 29, Kalaignar said Jayalalitha’s announcement on Kancheepuram Silk Park Project was a humbug.
• Kalaignar on August 4 said Jayalalitha’s statement on strategies to increase agricultural production and on Kuruvai cultivation an effort to place people in Fools Paradise and urged her to conduct a genuine review and give relief to delta farmers.
• On August 3, he alleged that the post of Chairman of TNERC was kept vacant for a senior official who will retire soon from service; dissatisfaction of officials over continuing sudden transfers; and snatching money from government employees in Medical Insurance scheme; a huge ‘transfer mela’ at the Secretariat in which ministers make money to the tune of several crores, corruption in appointments.

Besides these charges and allegations leveled by Kalaignar against Jayalalitha and her regime, some dailies and periodicals now and then were publishing damning reports about her government.

The New Delhi-based ‘Tehelka’ exposed scandals in Free Laptop scheme for students, Free milch animals scheme and a story on Sasikala’s exit from Poes Garden – in which it had exposed her hand in administration and collection of money. The ‘India Today’ (Tamil weekly) carried highly critical stories on 100 days of her regime, the state of books and manuscripts of Classical Tamil Research Library etc., ‘The Hindu’ and ‘Times of India’ and many Tamil dailies ….reported about cholera deaths. Even ‘Dinamalar’ often carried cases of corruption and irregularities, of course carefully sparing her.

During DMK rule, Kalaignar used to immediately refute allegations and charges of political parties and leaders including Jayalalitha, however ridiculous and stupid they were, and give clarifications to reports in dailies and magazines then and there - when they reported and irregularities he ordered immediate rectifications, which were acknowledged by them.

But under Jayalalitha’s regime, there were absolutely no responses or rejoinders from her or her ministers or the government to any of the above allegations made by Kalaignar and magazines, leave alone defamation cases. However, she has immediately reacted and filed defamation cases against political leaders and the media for commenting on her stay in Kodanad estate mansion.

This selective sensitivity of Jayalalitha raises many questions:

Does it mean that all the above mentioned charges and exposures made by Kalaignar and some sections of the media are conceded by her regime as true?

Besides the questions posed by Kalaignar on Kodanad estate palace, as the elected Chief Minister accountable to the people of the state, Jayalalitha ought to come out openly on the necessity for her prolonged stay there and put an end to avoidable speculations!

The hundreds of defamation cases filed during her earlier regimes were never pursued and taken to the logical and judicial conclusion, increasing the number of cases in the courts, wasting public money, precious time of the courts only to be withdrawn by the successive government, causing enormous mental agony to those against whom the cases were filed. Are defamation cases used only as a tool to harass political opponents and media, taking courts also for a ride?

Bundle of Contradictions, and Egoistic Opportunism!

Politics as a career in essentially taken up by people out of convictions and ideologies. But there are exceptions for whom it is coincidental and for the convenience of the self. The present Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu and ADMK supremo Jayalalitha belongs to the second category. Her advent into politics and rise to lead power in the state were coincidental and she uses both for her personal convenience. So the contradictory stands she had been taking all along on almost every issue, in the absence of any convictions or ideologies were only to serve her personal convenience of the time.

After her avowed ‘political mentor’ MGR, whose rise in politics and to state power were essentially due to film stardom, became the Chief Minister of TN and had to face ideologically driven virulent opposition of the DMK, he believed that only filmy glamour could counter the opposition. With the rest of his film heroines politely refusing to oblige him in the political venture, the choice fell on his one time heroine with whom he had been keeping a distance for over a decade, Jayalalitha. But soon he realized that she was making foxy use of the positions he had given and issued a directive to his followers not to have any contact with her, which he did not at all rescind till his death.

Hence Jayalalitha was aggrieved with MGR, whatever may be her pretentions in public. She wrote letters to the then Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi in her own handwriting and sent through her confidant then Salem Kannan, in which she had complained that MGR was envious of her growth in the party and popularity among people. She had said that he was dysfunctional following his ailment and treatment in the USA and could not discharge duty as Chief Minister and requested the PM to appoint her as the Chief Minister.

Even as the first NDA government at the Centre led by Prime Minister A.B.Vajpayee in 1998-99 was facing the tunes of turbulence created by her, the English weekly ‘Outlook’ published a cover story in its issue dated May 4, 1998 under the heading ‘The Life and Times of Jayalalitha’ written by Ajith Pillai and A.S. Panneerselvam which vividly brought out her egotism and contradictions. The article states:

MISJUDGED, misled, misinterpreted, misunderstood and mismanaged. All this, say her friends, has rendered J. Jayalalitha highly unpredictable, as the BJP found out to its dismay. Personal considerations motivate political actions. Good and bad are differentiated by a mind ridden with angst rooted in a troubled past. Even success does not seem to have healed her victim syndrome.

Indeed, neither her allies nor her foes can explain why Jayalalitha projects herself as a victim even when she is cracking the whip.

Says Valampuri John, former MP: "She is a bundle of contradictions. There is a deep-rooted attitudinal problem which can be traced to her past. She perceives all men in her life—her father, MGR, her one-time live-in friend Shoban Babu—as people who failed her. Therefore she seems to have developed a deep distrust of almost everyone." John, who helped Jayalalitha in her formative political years and published a semi-autobiographical novel and two books of essays, stands discarded. He too has joined the ranks of those who once helped the AIADMK chief.

The disenchantment with practically everyone she was close to is reflected in her autobiography published in the Tamil weekly Kumudam in 1978. Her father is presented as a "squanderer and a gentleman of leisure", a man "who could not handle anything properly". MGR is a person who she said she would rather "treat as an equal rather than a superstar". A ‘betrayal’ by a school friend too left a deep impression. Jayalalitha had played postman for this friend who was in love with a neighbour. But "when the girl’s mother discovered what was going on, my friend played Brutus and painted me as a daughter of an actress and a girl of loose morals."

This overwhelming sense of being ‘used’ seems to have influenced the worldview of the otherwise precocious and sensitive girl who dreamed of "becoming a millionaire and a lawyer", collected pictures of Rock Hudson and had a crush on cricketers Nari Contractor and Mansur Ali Khan Pataudi.

"I used to go for matches with binoculars just to look at Pataudi and Pataudi alone," she croons. Her dream world collapsed when her mother Sandhya—also an actress known to MGR—revealed that a "financial crisis in the family" meant that ‘Jay’ would have to give up studies and start acting. Recalls Jayalalitha: "It was a rude shock to me. My argument with Amma was that it was she who punished me for putting on make-up and told me to stay off cinema who was now pushing me into acting."

So the 16-year-old, instead of going to Stella Maris College, went to the sets of director C.V. Sridhar’s film Vennira Aadai (Widow’s Robe). An ironic title for a woman who never married, although she confesses she never understood "the word platonic" and believed that "either there is a romantic relationship between two people or they are just friends". A loner, Jayalalitha seems to have harboured a distrust for others rather early in life. "The experiences I have been through, the suffering and pain have taught me an important lesson: in life there is one person you must rely on—yourself."

Her former friends have all been abandoned. Cho Ramaswamy, editor of Tughlaq who she fondly describes in her autobiography as a ‘valuable’ friend, was recently admonished publicly and asked "not to describe himself as a friend". Salem Kannan, two-time AIADMK MP who virtually created a political base for her in the party, is now persona non grata. Ministers in MGR’s cabinet and former Jaya loyalists S. Thirunavakkarsu and K.K.S.S.R Ramachandran have been eased out of the party. Says Kannan: "After all that I have done for her, I am deeply hurt at the manner in which she dumped me when I advised her to keep Sasikala and her family at a distance."

Kannan and Valampuri John were privy to her blow-hot-blow-cold relationship with MGR. According to John, MGR was ‘suspicious’ of Jayalalitha and monitored her every move. He realised that she was a very independent woman "who acted on her own volition". Indeed, when MGR opted for a new heroine in 1970, an irate Jaya found a new friend in Telugu star Shoban Babu. It was only in 1981 that the relationship was revived, leading to her induction into politics a year later. Recollects Kannan: "A minister in MGR’s cabinet invited Jayalalitha to present a dance-drama at Madurai. MGR was so impressed by her performance that they became friends again."

Though the friendship was revived, MGR kept a close tab on his Ammu. Notes John: "This played on her mind. She felt she was a trapped woman being observed under a microscope. But she also seemed to have enjoyed all the attention." Interestingly, among those asked to spy on her by MGR was Sasikala who then ran a video parlour. Later, she became one of her closest advisers. Notes Kannan: "Very few people know this. But copies of the letters she wrote to me on her political moves made their way to MGR. I am convinced that this was given to him by Sasikala."

MGR had reasons to be suspicious. In late 1984 when he was hospitalised in the US following a stroke, Jayalalitha, a Rajya Sabha MP since 1983, was convinced that she should take over the reins. She approached the then prime minister, Rajiv Gandhi, and governor S.L. Khurana to appoint her chief minister since she felt that MGR’s health would not permit him to discharge his duties. Her moves were widely reported. Kannan who acted as her courier confirms her efforts to get to the top slot. So does John. Thirunavakkarsu. And R.M. Veerappan.

Stung by her moves, MGR stripped her of the deputy leadership of the parliamentary party. In an interview to Savvy magazine, she articulated her anger against the decision: "MGR has been a great influence in my life, I don’t deny that. But now I am my own person. I have evolved. Hereafter, I am responsible only for myself. Never again will anybody influence me to such an extent that all my thoughts and actions and statements are influenced and made in a particular way just because someone else wants it that way."

 In this "I will launch myself" mode, a parallel outfit called the Jayalalitha Peravai (conference) was formed in 1986, courtesy Kannan. Though Jayalalitha has denied any hand in its formation, Kannan told Outlook that it was with her full knowledge. The formation of the Peravai upset MGR no end. She was asked to stop functioning as the propaganda secretary of the AIADMK, a post specially created for her in 1983, and Kannan was expelled from the party. "When I met MGR he was very cryptic in telling me not to support that woman," says Kannan. The rivalry continued and in early 1987 the group opposed to Jayalalitha managed to convince MGR to convene the general council of the party to expel Jayalalitha and her friends. Sensing this, 33 MLAs owing allegiance to Jayalalitha held a meeting and decided to approach Rajiv to prevail upon MGR to stall Jayalalitha’s expulsion. Says Kannan: "This meeting was wrongly reported by the state intelligence as a move to float a rival party. A bitter and sad MGR could not stomach his protege breaking away. The sacking of Jayalalitha was struck off the general council’s agenda and Madam was invited to speak at a public rally that evening." This was the turning point in her career.

According to Jayalalitha’s inner circle, it was her success in managing MGR, often described as the wiliest of CMs, that convinced her she could manipulate all categories of politicians. Her pressure tactics with the BJP, they aver, are only a manifestation of this. Her former friend Thirunavakkarsu notes: "She has a history of using people and then discarding them." According to him, she has no permanent friends. This perhaps explains why she has tied up with her one-time arch rival Subramanian Swamy. Adds Thirunavakkarsu: "You cannot view her actions through traditional logic. She is a very impulsive person who manufactures situations to push her own personal agenda."

To a great degree, MGR is responsible for her achieving instant VIP status in the party. It was he who gave orders to partymen that they should stand up to show their respect to her. It was he who advised her to shun the media. When she came to power in 1991, she took all this to an extreme limit. She kept even her ministers at a distance. It was widely believed that it was Sasikala Natarajan who ran the government.

But the final word comes from Cho: "It is her habit to make unfavourable remarks against her allies. She did it to Narasimha Rao. But this is the first time that she is trying to humiliate a PM. She is in a desperate hurry. Perhaps the cases against her could be solved only when the state government is changed. What she fails to understand is that the mandate is as much the BJP’s as the AIADMK’s."

Political wisdom dictates that Jayalalitha should be more diplomatic. But Jayalalitha functions on the principle, what Jaya wants Jaya shall get. Given her past, it doesn’t seem that preposterous, but for the Vajpayee government it spells continued turbulence.”

As this article predicted as early as May 4 immediately after the first NDA government at the Centre was formed, the Vajpayee government was under the spell on continuing turbulence till at last it was brought down by Jayalalitha after 13 months in May 1999, at the end of which a vexed Vajpayee declared that the biggest blunder committed by him in his public life was aligning with Jayalalitha and vouched that he would not commit the blunder again in his lifetime.

It was during this period that the Cauvery River Authority (CRA) with the Prime Minister as Chairman and the Chief Ministers of contending states of Karnataka, Kerala, Tamil Nadu and Pondicherry was set up as per the directive of the Supreme Court. The two point covert programme on which Jayalalitha extended her party’s support to the NDA government was: Dismissal of the DMK government in Tamil Nadu and withdrawal of corruption cases against her, which were not obliged by the ‘right man in the wrong party’ Vajpayee, as disclosed by him after the fall of the government. Hence she was blindly opposing every move of the government at the Centre and so too the CRA, which Kalaignar has exposed in his epistle (See page no………………………….……………) And even the arguments advanced by her against the CRA in her statement, but for the epithet ‘toothless wonder; were not her own but copied verbatim from an article by former Union Minister Mani Shankar Iyer that was published on the same day in the ‘Indian Express’ daily.

From the year 1989 to 2009, Jayalalitha by performing shameless somersaults was coming to a full-circle on the issue of Lankan Tamils and Tamil Eelam in general and the LTTE and Prabhakaran in particular. Bereft of any consistency in principles or ideology, the only motivating force in her public life is opposing Kalaignar on whatever he says or does and attempting one-upmanship over him, all of which ultimately end in fiasco.

In this context of the LTTE and Prabhakaran, while Kalaignar, since 1981, had all along been urging the various Tamil militant groups to unite and avoid fratricidal fights, MGR during his rule, patronized and pampered only the LTTE as against other groups. He instigated Prabhakaran to boycott TESO conference at Madurai on May 4, 1986 organised by Kalaignar, in which national leaders like A.B.Vajpayee and George Fernandes participated and also not to accept the fund mobilized by Kalaignar for all Lankan Tamil militant groups. But for the policy of the then Prime Minister Indira Gandhi to actively support the cause of Tamil Eelam and training given and arms supplied to these groups, MGR would not have had the courage to extend support to them. MGR announced in the State Assembly on April 27, 1987, that he would give Rs.4 crore to the LTTE, and paid it the same day.

Jayalalitha also selectively supported the LTTE and its leader Prabhakaran in 1989 and 1990 even after the Indo-Sri Lankan Accord. She made several statements in press interviews and at public meetings between 1988 and 1990 backing the LTTE, even in the presence of Rajiv Gandhi. On February 22, 1988, she admitted she had met LTTE representatives in Chennai. In March 21, 1988, she demanded that India immediately halt the military operations against the LTTE and call Prabhakaran for discussions. On the other hand, when an LTTE delegation led by Anton Balasingam wanted to meet Kalaignar in 1990, he told them to come through the proper channel (Government of India) and this was carried by ‘The Indian Express’. Kalaignar, in an interview to the Indian Express on November 16, 1997 said “I had abided by the Centre’s policy (on Sri Lanka) and acted accordingly. The then Prime Ministers Rajiv Gandhi and V.P.Singh in the 1989-1990 period had asked me to hold discussions with the LTTE and others with a view to bring about a compromise and a smooth solution to the Sri Lankan Tamils issue. In fact, Rajiv Gandhi himself praised my stand at election meetings in Tamil Nadu on 6.11.1989.”

Jayalalitha, on the contrary, in her media interviews in 1988, 1989 and 1990, had openly supported the LTTE, as the sole representatives of the Lankan Tamils and demanded military action to intervene in the ethnic problem. She had specifically criticized Kalaignar for ‘doing nothing’ to help the LTTE, as Chief Minister in 1990. Within a few months of the assassination of EPRLF leader Padmanabha and others in Chennai on June 19, 1990, Jayalalitha gave an interview to the Indian Express (October 4, 1990) stating that the LTTE had not indulged in any criminal activity in the last two months that gave room for complaint in the State. To a specific question whether  the DMK government was rendering help to the LTTE, though not to the same extent as MGR did, she had said: “I see no evidence of it!” (All these she said when V.P.Singh was the Prime Minister and the DMK was ruling in the State)

Likewise, Jayalalitha was taking contradictory stands on Lankan Tamils, militants who were fighting against Sinhala armed forces and on the cause of separate Tamil Eelam. Kalaignar has time and again exposed her inconsistent and contradictory stands to suit her political needs of the time.

In an exclusive interview given to the ‘Indian Express’ on 4.10.1990, she said LTTE was the only heroic force fighting against the Sri Lankan army. “In the last two months the LTTE was not involved in any actions in Tamil Nadu to be complained of. Now the LTTE is fighting against the government of a country. This is a heroic act. We should bear in mind that if the LTTE is destroyed the entire Tamil race in Sri Lanka will perish. The victory of LTTE is the victory of Tamils. Instead of doing something helpful to them Chief Minister Karunanidhi is only concerned about saving himself. Prime Minister V.P.Singh does not seem to be worried about Lankan Tamils. In the changed situation the only cure is Tamil people totally supporting the LTTE. Chief Minister Karunanidhi should give all assistance within his powers. The Central government should either find out a peaceful settlement on the basis of India-Lanka Accord as per the provisions therein or 100 percent support LTTE.”

At this point the correspondent of the daily asked her “you still say the LTTE should be supported even after they rejected the peace accord for which she said, “The LTTE have committed mistakes in the past. But if we do not support the LTTE, it will cause destruction of Tamil race in Sri Lanka. We should see that from that angle.”

Jayalalitha spoke on the same line in a public meeting participated by Rajiv Gandhi. “Jayalalitha accused the Centre and State government of not doing anything to save Tamils in Sri Lanka. If the LTTE was defeated in present struggle against Sri Lankan government the entire Tamil race in that island would perish.” (Indian Express, 8.10.1990)

In an interview to the Hindu on 24.9.1990 Jayalalitha had said that she did not think anything wrong if India thought of military action as Indira Gandhi did in Bangladesh issue.

But after the fall of V.P.Singh government in December 1990, she changed her tunes and turned anti-LTTE with the sole purpose of getting the DMK government dismissed by the Centre. She submitted a ‘confidential’ 102-page memorandum to the then Prime Minister Chandrasekhar on December 20, 1990, detailing evidence of ‘Karunanidhi’s links with Prabhakaran gang’, which Chandrasekhar found ‘sufficiently irrefutable’ to dismiss the government on January 30, 1991, in the absence of Governor’s report, which the then Governor Thiru Surjit Singh Barnala refused to sign. In fact, the 102-page memorandum submitted by Jayalalitha was ‘doctored by the Chandrasekhar government to prepare ground for the dismissal of the DMK government. The conspirators were the then Law Minister Dr. Subramanian Swamy and the Minister of State for Home Affairs Subodh Kant Sahay with whom she co-ordinated.

In the General elections in May 1991, Jayalalitha made political and electoral gain of the brutal assassination of Rajiv Gandhi at Sriperumpudur by an LTTE suicide bomber, accusing the DMK of hobnobbing with the rebels and facilitating a base for them in Tamil Nadu. Swept to power on the sympathy factor following the heinous act, and in total change of track over her past statements on and relationship with the LTTE, she claimed credit for the ban on LTTE by the Centre and extensions of the ban.

She also declared that she had totally driven out LTTE from the soil of Tamil Nadu, took severe action against those who were sympathetic to the ‘terrorist outfit’ and maintained the state as a ‘garden of peace’. Having ascended to power on the blood of Rajiv Gandhi, the ungrateful Jayalalitha instigated a third rate woman platform speaker – ADMK legislator to speak in the Assembly that their ‘Puratchi Thalaivi came to power only by her influence among the people and not by showing the portrait of a corpse lying upside down with only an undergarment in the waist.’ While she had been charging that the DMK was close to the LTTE, the Centre sent a communication to the Jayalalitha government on September 28, 1993, that it had received information that the ‘LTTE had planned to eliminate’ Kalaignar in order to promote V.Gopalsamy (now MDMK leader). The Centre also wanted the ADMK government then to make proper security arrangements for him. The Jaya government wrote to Kalaignar on October 2, 1993, on the report on LTTE threat and suggesting a security arrangement which he accepted.

Jayalalitha having conspired along with Chandrasekhar government for the dismissal of the DMK government in 1991 on the baseless charges of links with the LTTE, is now claiming that Kalaignar government was not dismissed on the Lankan Tamils’ issue but for ‘infringing the sovereignty of India’ (What does this mean?)

Even while she continued to sell her vicious propaganda against Kalaignar in her deposition before the Jain Commission inquiring into the conspiracy angle in Rajiv Gandhi assassination, the spat between her and Subramanian Swamy accusing each other of having prior information of the plot to kill the former Prime Minister, was well known. However certain questions still remain unanswered mysteries. They were, why Jayalalitha or even none of her party functionaries or cadre went to Meenambakkam airport on the fateful day to receive the leader of their alliance and why none accompanied his motorcade to Sriperumpudur? How and why Jayalalitha cancelled her joint campaign with Rajiv Gandhi scheduled at Poonamalle, Sriperumpudur and Krishnagiri even before his arrival at Chennai?

After coming back to power in 2001, Jayalalitha continued with her drive against LTTE supporters in the state. In the year 2002, in an unprecedented move, the Tamil Nadu Assembly urged the Centre to seek immediate extradition of Prabhakaran to stand trial for the assassination of former Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi. In case the Sri Lankan Government was unable to capture the LTTE chief, the Indian Army should be sent to nab him after taking the Lankan Government’s permission, the Assembly stated in a resolution which was adopted on April 16. Speaking while moving the resolution, Jayalalitha said there should not be any laxity in bringing Prabhakaran to justice in the name of having good diplomatic ties with Sri Lanka.

A few days prior to that, Jayalalitha said that even if the Centre allowed Tiger spokesman Anton Balasingham to come to India for treatment, Tamil Nadu’s doors were closed to him. The people were “greatly shocked” by Prabhakaran’s April 10 news conference at Kilinochchi, the resolution said, rejecting the advocacy of “forget-the-past attitude” with regard to Rajiv Gandhi’s murder. The resolution said that though the Centre has branded the LTTE a terrorist organisation, other pro-LTTE groups like the TNLA and the TNRT posed a threat to the country’s security. Jayalalitha even accused forest brigand Veerappan of being aided and abetted by the LTTE.

When the Congress and the DMK entered into electoral alliance for the 2004 Lok Sabha elections, Jayalalitha criticised Tmt. Sonia Gandhi and questioned her ‘loyalty to her husband’. The Congress President snubbed her by her majestic indifference to such sub-standard woman’s babbles.

This year 2009 saw Jayalalitha turning topsy-turvy over the position she had been taking all these years since 1991, and going back to the 1989 stand. On January 17, she told journalists at her party office in Chennai, that the LTTE was using Tamils as human shield in the war against Sri Lankan army.

“The killing of the innocent Tamils can be avoided if the LTTE allows them safe passage,” she said. She argued that the Sri Lankan army’s intention was not to kill the Tamils.  “But the killing of innocents is inevitable in a war. No country is an exception.”  She even took exception to the usage, ‘Eelam Tamils,’ saying it could not be used since there was no separate Eelam. Instead, she preferred the word, ‘Sri Lankan Tamils.’

As for the demand for India’s intervention to ensure a ceasefire, Jayalalitha said there was a limit to how far one country could interfere in the internal affairs of another souvereign country.

She said the fact remained that the LTTE was a terrorist organisation. “Many countries have declared the LTTE a terrorist organisation. It has been banned in India.”  Jayalalitha said the fast observed by Viduthalai Chiruthaikal Katchi (VCK) leader Thol Thirumavalavan, demanding a ceasefire in Sri Lanka, was a drama and reflected the argument that the outfit was the sole representative of Lankan Tamils. Her statements were widely carried in the official website of Sri Lankan Defence ministry.

When Kalaignar penned an elegy condoling the death of LTTE’s political wing leader Tamil Selvan on 4.11.2007, Jayalalitha jumped heaven and earth and accused him of still patronizing the LTTE.

But suddenly on the eve of Lok Sabha elections, when the concern for ending war in Sri Lanka was on the high, Jayalalitha took up the cause with the calculation of reaping electoral gains and ‘vouched’ that she would secure Eelam for Tamils by sending Indian army. Not only the pro-LTTE elements like Nedumaran, Vaiko, Dr. Ramadoss and D.Pandian uncritically and unquestioningly welcomed her somersault, but also the pro-LTTE websites started putting up her statements. Even while she was thundering Tamil Eelam slogan on the stages, when Kalaignar told NDTV on April 16 that he would regret the killing of Prabhakaran in the war but would say it was because of their fratricidal feuds, Jayalalitha spoke to the CNN-IBN TV the very next day at Madurai in the midst of her campaign and asked Tmt. Sonia Gandhi, as ‘widow of Rajiv Gandhi’ to come out against Kalaignar for ‘glorifying’ the killers of her husband. Surprisingly, the pro-LTTE leaders of Tamil Nadu not only aligned with and supported Jayalalitha but never questioned her on such occasions.

As a whole, Jayalalitha did not ever have any consistent stand on Lankan Tamils issue and their fight for self-determination, but it was dictated by political and electoral conveniences and exigencies.  She displayed a set of outlook and attitude whenever she was in power and another when she was not and Kalaignar ruled the state.

Almost in every other issue and about leaders Jayalalitha had been taking contradictory stands according to situations. After blaming Rajiv Gandhi of going to bed early in night unbecoming of a Prime Minister, she aligned with him for the elections in 1989 and 1991. Ridiculing P.V.Narasimha Rao of ‘generation gap’ with her, she sought an alliance with him for 1996 General elections. After faulting senior BJP leader L.K.Advani for ‘selective amnesia’ both had no qualms in meeting recently prior to Presidential elections. She and her minions had derided communist parties on a number of occasions but both conveniently forget when forging alliance. She accused actor-politician Vijayakanth of coming drunk to the Assembly, but for the 2011 Assembly election she was hankering for bringing him to the ADMK alliance. What she said of a senior leader Navalar V.R.Nedunchezhian and how she accommodated him in her party and government is history. The list of her opportunitistic and egoistic contradictions are endless.

It is not that either those who are in her alliance or the so-called enlightened and well-informed media are not aware of her inconsistencies and contradictions; but do not criticize or question her in their antipathy for Kalaignar and the DMK, thereby justifying and still upholding the validity of the views of Thanthai Periyar on casteism, caste-hierarchy and casteist arrogance !

Can We Afford to Another Disastrous Experiment?

Presiding over an ostentatious function to celebrate 14^th anniversary of Jaya TV channel and felicitation of film music directors M.S.Viswanathan and T.K.Ramamurthy, Chief Minister Jayalalitha has regretted that the music duo had not been given Padma awards by the Centre. But she did not stop with that. As she is used to, she said, “I recommended their names for Padma awards of last year. However, the Centre which has view against the State government, did not pay heed to it. The time will fructify when this award is given if I say, then I will make them get the award.”

Every year all State governments send lists of distinguished persons in different walks of life from their respective states for conferring Padma Awards by the President. The Central government has the unenviable task of balancing the interests of various states in the process of selecting the awardees. That precisely is the reason that no Chief Minister of any state openly disclose the names of the recommended for two reasons: one, no awardee shall feel that his/her merit was recognized by the country only on recommendation and two, to avoid any unnecessary disappointment or heartburn for them whose names are not considered in that year. During his rules, Kalaignar had recommended these awards for many persons, but he never claimed credit for them, lest it could be construed as an insult to the distinction of the awardees concerned.

So it is very mean of megalomaniac Jayalalitha to reveal that she recommended Padma awards to the much acclaimed musical vizards M.S.Viswanathan and T.K.Ramamurthy. In a sense it is a humiliation meted out to them – even if they are awarded in future, it will be an embarrassment for them.

That aside, the country has already witnessed the most torturous 13 months of the first NDA government led by suave gentleman A.B.Vajpayee at the Centre, perpetually intimidated by Jayalalitha, at last pulling it down and thrusting another general elections in one year, causing enormous loss for the nation. Now Jayalalitha wants a government again at the Centre which will ‘abide’ by her ‘dictates’! People of the nation and particularly political class (including of course her minions in ADMK) would shudder to think about such a disastrous experiment again in the country. Such was their experience in those 13 months in 1998-99! Let us refresh our memory of what all happened then.

In 1998, while DMK was in power at the State, BJP and ADMK fought the Lok Sabha polls together (with MDMK). During the course of seat allocation, it appeared that BJP was given a raw deal as ADMK allocated unfavourable seats to BJP. A case in point being, Jayalalitha ensured that late Rangarajan Kumaramangalam was denied the Salem constituency and allocated that to Vazhapadi K. Ramamurthy (who headed Rajiv Indira Congress and was part of BJP led NDA) at that time. A reluctant Rangarajan had to contest at Tiruchchirappalli Lok Sabha constituency. Incidentally, days before the election serial bomb blasts rocked Coimbatore and the expected anti-incumbency factor took effect ensured that the alliance sailed through with BJP opening its account in Tamil Nadu. The alliance won 25 seats (ADMK - 18, BJP - 3, MDMK - 3, Rajiv Indira Congress - 1) out of 39. Jayalalitha exposed her true colours by dragging her feet on everything related to the government formation at the Centre. At first, she failed to give her letter of support to the President, which was a necessity at that time given the fractured nature of the verdict. All through the 13 month period that the government lasted, she held Atal Behari Vajpayee led NDA government to ransom with her frequent unreasonable demands. Finally, the uneasy alliance ended when Jayalalitha pulled the plug by withdrawing support to the NDA government in April 1999.

Even during the formation of Ministry troubles started. Prime Minister Vajpayee refused to accommodate Subramanian Swamy as Cabinet Minister despite Jayalalitha’s recommendation to make him either Finance or Commerce Minister. Subramanian Swamy urged her to take a tough stand.

The ‘Frontline’ in a story ‘Dealing with Jayalalitha’ reported in April 1998:

ADMK General Secretary Jayalalitha will now have to choose between the BJP and Janata Party leader Subramanian Swamy. The BJP is said to have indicated to her that she would have to make her choice before the Budget session of the Lok Sabha begins on May 27. BJP sources in Chennai told Frontline that the party would not accept Subramanian Swamy's presence in the ADMK-led front in Tamil Nadu if he continued to say that he would topple the Vajpayee Government.

BJP leader Jaswant Singh flew in from Delhi and met Jayalalitha at her Payyanoor retreat, 60 km from Chennai, on April 25. Sources said that Jaswant Singh did some "plain talking". He apparently told Jayalalitha that the BJP would not accept her three major demands: dismissal of the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) Government in Tamil Nadu; the removal of Ram Jethmalani and Ramakrishna Hegde from the Union Cabinet; and action against a private television channel (Sun TV) based in Chennai. The sources added that Jaswant Singh ruled out a place for Subramanian Swamy in the coordination committee. He also told her to put an end to attacks by some ADMK functionaries on Jethmalani and Hegde.

Jaswant Singh met Jayalalitha against the background of a slanging match between Jethmalani and Hegde on the one hand and ADMK Ministers at the Centre, M. Thambi Durai, R. Janarthanan and R.K. Kumar, on the other. The row followed the April 8 resignation of Union Surface Transport Minister Sedapatti R. Muthiah of the ADMK after a Chennai court framed charges against him in a case of acquisition of assets disproportionate to his known source of income during his tenure as the Speaker of the Tamil Nadu Assembly from July 1991 to October 1994.

The situation worsened a week later. After a meeting of the ADMK executive committee on April 15, Jayalalitha demanded that all Union Ministers who were charge-sheeted in corruption cases resign or be dismissed by the Prime Minister. The next day, Jethamalani and Hegde strongly criticised her and predicted that these "pinpricks" would end soon.

On April 18 Jayalalitha wrote to Vajpayee naming three Ministers - Communications Minister Buta Singh, Urban Development Minister Jethmalani and Commerce Minister Hegde - as being involved in cases of corruption and demanding their removal or the re-induction of Muthiah. On April 19 Jethmalani again launched a broadside against Jayalalitha. He took on Subramanian Swamy too. "It is clearly Dr. Subramanian Swamy who is pushing her into making all these wild demands," he said. Hegde wanted Vajpayee to go in for fresh elections instead of giving in to Jayalalitha's "blackmail". In reply, Thambi Durai, Kumar and Janarthanan, in a statement on April 23, asked Vajpayee to "advise Mr. Hegde to either shut up or get out."

It was at this stage that the BJP high command intervened and sent Jaswant Singh to meet Jayalalitha. Jaswant Singh had earlier come in March to placate her when she delayed giving the letters of support that would enable Vajpayee to form the government. BJP sources said that this time Jaswant Singh made it clear that junior Ministers of the ADMK should not speak out of turn. If the ADMK leadership had something to say, Jayalalitha should be the one to say that, he said. He also advised her against rushing to the media. The BJP high command was annoyed that her letter to Vajpayee had been released to the media.

Jaswant Singh was reportedly categorical about the BJP's decision not to invoke Article 356 to dismiss the DMK Government. A senior BJP source said: "We are tightening the screws. The idea is that this war of words cannot go on... You will find a change from now on."

There was no word from Jayalalitha about the meeting. Sources in Chennai indicated that there was no meeting ground between Jayalalitha and Jaswant Singh. Jaswant Singh, however, claimed that the "mission was a success". On the welter of charges and counter-allegations made by Union Ministers, he said that the Prime Minister "will take such action as he deems fit and proper."

The same day K.L. Sharma said in New Delhi that Subramanian Swamy would not be included in the coordination committee because he had failed to vote for the Government in the vote of confidence.

WHETHER by accident or design, a DMK executive meeting presided over by Chief Minister M. Karunanidhi on April 25 condemned the demand for the dismissal of the Government that emanated from an "enemy party" and Union Ministers belonging to it as "blatant blackmail" and "devoid of any merit at all". It added that the demand was made "to subserve their vested interests, with palpable mala fides in order to avoid accountability to the courts of law in the pending cases of corruption."

The resolution also condemned the transfer of Union Special Secretary for Home Ashok Kumar, one of two officials sent as part of the Central team to study the law and order situation in Tamil Nadu, and said that this was done because he told the "truth". The resolution said that this approach amounted to "burying" federalism and marked a "dictatorial trend in interfering in the State Government's affairs."

The resolution added: "In the event of any such proclamation (for dismissal) being made in Delhi because of the blackmail of the vested interests," it would be "resisted by constitutional, lawful and peaceful methods in courts of law." The executive committee appealed to all democratic forces "to support this resistance movement."

When a reporter asked Karunanidhi whether the resolution was driven by the fear that his Government would be dismissed, he said: "This is only a reply to the threats from some terrorists in Poes Garden."

The Chief Minister called the resolution "an advance notice to the Centre that it should not give room to some people who have been trying to paralyse the administration and disrupt law and order by repeatedly claiming that the DMK Government will be dismissed."

After the Jaswant Singh-Jayalalitha meeting, ADMK leaders fell silent. However, Subramanian Swamy stepped up the offensive once it was known that he was not welcome to the coordination committee. He alleged on April 26 that the BJP citing his not having voted for the Government was an "excuse" to exclude him from the coordination committee. According to him, the real reason for the crisis was the "asymmetrical application of the criterion" on who should be a Union Minister. He said that while Muthiah was asked to resign, "tainted" Ministers such as Hegde and Advani were allowed to continue. Advani's crime - he was charge-sheeted in the Babri Masjid demolition case - was not a "political crime", he said, but "a crime against humanity and the integrity of the nation..."

Swamy met Jayalalitha in Chennai on April 27 and said that he was "free to explore the possibility of creating an alternative, secular, patriotic front" at the Centre. He declared that henceforth "in national politics, I am a free bird." He claimed that Jayalalitha had told him that Jaswant Singh "never discussed the matter" of his exclusion from the coordination committee. Although he would consider breaking away from the BJP-led alliance, he asserted that he continued to be part and parcel of the ADMK-led front in Tamil Nadu.

Jayalalitha, BJP sources said, was faced with a difficult situation. "If Swamy remains in the ADMK front in Tamil Nadu, then there is nothing wrong in the BJP getting close to somebody who is against her, such as the DMK. She has to choose between the BJP and Swamy."

Political analysts believed that Jayalalitha was left with "no choice". She could not part company with the BJP because the stakes involved were high - there were corruption cases pending against her and her former Ministers, and breaking away from the BJP would weaken her.

The response of the other constituents of the ADMK-led front to Swamy's challenge will have a bearing on Jayalalitha's future course of action. Of the three of them - MDMK, the PMK and the Tamizhaga Rajiv Congress - the PMK and the TRC are participants in the Central Government. The PMK had indicated its position when its leader S. Ramadoss hinted that his party would not play along with Subramanian Swamy. 

In August 1998, the following was reported:

In politics, as in pugilism, Jayalalitha said, the "knock-out blow" would come only in the end. Nothing summed up the combative nature of the relationship between the All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam and the Bharatiya Janata Party more succinctly than the boxing metaphor employed by the ADMK general secretary on August 10. Addressing a press conference in Chennai, she warned that her party would review its support to the Atal Behari Vajpayee Government if it failed to notify the original draft scheme for implementing the Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal's Interim Award. (an alibi to reject Cauvery River Authority)

Over the next 10 days, the ADMK leader administered several more body blows to the BJP, which virtually had the Vajpayee Government out for the count. The survival instinct, however, kept it hanging on in the ring, and the BJP even managed to throw in a couple of counterpunches, feeble though they were. By the last week of August, both combatants had retreated to their corners and were towelling themselves up; to most observers, it seemed abundantly clear that the bout would not last more than a few more rounds.

One reason why the ADMK did not administer the "knock-out blow" this time around was presumably that Jayalalitha did not receive any concrete signal from Congress(I) president Sonia Gandhi regarding the formation of a coalition government if the ADMK pulled out of the Vajpayee Government.

One reason why she did not administer the "knock-out blow" to the Vajpayee Government now was presumbly that she did not receive any signal from the Congress(I) on the formation of an alternative government.

On the other hand, the BJP had succeeded to an extent in isolating the ADMK from its allies in Tamil Nadu. Dr. S. Ramadoss of the Pattali Makkal Katchi (PMK), Vaiko of the Marumalarchi Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (MDMK) and Vazhapadi K. Ramamurthi of the Tamilaga Rajiv Congress (TRC) made it plain to Jayalalitha that they would continue to support the Vajpayee Government. Only Janata Party president Subramanian Swamy, another ally of the ADMK, was keen on pulling down the BJP-led Government.

The Cauvery issue, over which a confrontation erupted on August 10, lay submerged for a while in a flood of other allegations and counter-allegations between the ADMK and the BJP over the transfer of the Director of the Enforcement Directorate, M.K. Bezbaruah, Finance Secretary Montek Singh Ahluwalia, Revenue Secretary N.K. Singh and other top officials.

On August 16, Jayalalitha wrote to Prime Minister A.B. Vajpayee demanding that the transfers be reversed. In a statement released the same day, she alleged that the owners of a "well-known group of publications" had paid "hefty bribes to persons very close to the Prime Minister's office to get Mr. Bezbaruah transferred out of the E.D." She condemned the "cunning attempt" to make it appear that the transfers had been effected to placate her since some of her close associates are facing investigations by the E.D. for alleged violations of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act. According to Jayalalitha, there was "no connection whatsoever between me" and the transfer of Bezbaruah, N.K. Singh and Ahluwalia, but she was made a "scapegoat" in the transfers. She said when George Fernandes and Pramod Mahajan called on her: "I did not broach any subject other than the Cauvery river water issue."

"(The newspaper owners) cleverly exploited the present situation to their advantage by making it appear that I had demanded Bezbaruah's transfer and achieved their objective by pinning the blame on me," she said.

The next day, the Principal Secretary to the Prime Minister, Brajesh Mishra, wrote to Jayalalitha to request her to produce "all evidence" in respect of her allegation appearing in the newspapers that "hefty bribes" were paid to "persons very close to the Prime Minister" to get Bezbaruah transferred out.

In response, P. Mahalingam, executive secretary at the ADMK headquarters (in effect, the office manager) [whom ‘The Telegraph’ referred to as Tea Boy in ADMK office] wrote to Mishra on August 19 demanding an inquiry by the Central Bureau of Investigation into "the furious lobbying" by a newspaper group for Bezbaruah's transfer. Mahalingam said: "Such an inquiry will reveal the motives behind the shifting of an upright officer more than two years before his tenure was completed." Mahalingam said that Vajpayee had written to Prime Minister I.K. Gujral and made serious allegations against the newspaper group and demanded a probe.

The fact that Jayalalitha had got a party official to respond to Mishra was perceived as an intended slight; Jayalalitha was evidently "getting even" with Vajpayee for having got Mishra to respond to her letter to the Prime Minister.

The August 7 agreement to set up a Cauvery River Authority and a monitoring committee to oversee the sharing of waters by Tamil Nadu and Karnataka was generally welcomed in Tamil Nadu. The ADMK, the PMK, the MDMK and the Janata Party, however, rejected the agreement. Their demand was that the original draft scheme of May 1997, which they argued was much more favourable to Tamil Nadu, should be notified in the Central gazette before August 12. The Supreme Court had given the Centre time till August 12 to resolve the issues relating to the Interim Award, which gave 205 tmc ft of water to Tamil Nadu.

On August 10, Jayalalitha said at a press conference that "we will review the question of support" to the BJP-led Government if it did not gazette the original draft scheme before August 12. The Government, however, went ahead and notified the new scheme on August 11.

The BJP leadership, after stating that no attempt would be made to pacify Jayalalitha, despatched George Fernandes and Pramod Mahajan to Chennai on August 12. Mahajan was sent because Jayalalitha wanted a BJP leader to accompany Fernandes, who belongs to the Samata Party. Jaswant Singh, who had come twice earlier on trouble-shooting missions, declined to go this time. Advani was apparently not in a mood to talk to her on the phone after her earlier critical remarks about him.

Informed sources said that Jayalalitha was deeply suspicious of Mahajan for his having reportedly blocked an inquiry into Sun TV (owned by Kalanidhi Maran, son of Murasoli Maran). Mahajan had also reportedly approached Murasoli Maran to secure the DMK's support to form a BJP Government after the fall of the Deve Gowda Government in 1997.

Fernandes and Mahajan were unnerved by the sort of reception they got at Jayalalitha's Poes Garden residence on August 12. She did not meet them but reportedly railed at them on the intercom. She asked Mahajan whether he had to come to Poes Garden by mistake when he should really be in Gopalapuram (where Maran lives in Chennai). She told Fernandes that the BJP did not consult her on the Cauvery issue but had presented her with a fait accompli. Fernandes and Mahajan went away, but came back late in the afternoon, by which time Jayalalitha had mellowed a bit. The Cauvery issue dominated the discussion, and she repeatedly stressed that the BJP had let her down and allowed Karunanidhi to walk away with the honours.

The same night, Vazhapadi Ramamurthi and Ramadoss met Vajpayee in New Delhi. Ramamurthi tersely told journalists: "There is no crisis."

While Jayalalitha was adamant that the ADMK should withdraw support to the BJP-led Government, her allies Ramadoss, Vaiko and Ramamurthi counselled patience, pointing out that any precipitate action on the eve of Independence Day - when Vajpayee was to hoist the national flag from the ramparts of the Red Fort - would tarnish the country's image. The three leaders also told her that their parties would continue to support the BJP Government if she withdrew support. Only Subramanian Swamy sided with her.

The same day (August 13), the Centre announced the "repatriation" of Bezbaruah to the Delhi Government.

Fernandes met Jayalalitha again on August 14 evening, after reportedly waiting in a military guest house throughout the day. But during that time, he met Ramadoss, who drove up from Tindivanam. Fernandes said he had "very good and useful talks" with Jayalalitha and was going back "quite satisfied". He denied that there was any kind of crisis. The same day, N.K. Singh, Montek Singh Ahluwalia and a host of other top officers were transferred, again leading to speculation that the transfers were effected to placate Jayalalitha.

She demanded the reinstatement of Bezbaruah because Union Minister of State for Personnel and Revenue R. Janarthanan of the ADMK was not consulted on the issue. On August 18, she demanded a CBI inquiry into Bezbaruah's transfer.

Fernandes added: "I took no package from the Prime Minister to Ms. Jayalalitha on both days. Nor was there any demand made by her on the Prime Minister during my meetings with her."

The war of words escalated when Mahalingam alleged in his letter to Brajesh Mishra that there was "frequent interaction of the impugned group's senior personnel with a gentleman who was till recently part of the PMO. Such close interaction with those facing serious charges which are under investigation naturally leads to adverse inferences." He added: "What is worse, an individual very close to the Prime Minister has had meetings with the Corporate Director of this group." The next day, Mahajan dared her to name him as the person to whom "hefty bribes" had been paid, and face legal action.

Jayalalitha's foremost worry now is to keep her alliance with the PMK, the MDMK and the TRC intact. A BJP leader summed up the present situation thus: "The period of reconciliation with Jayalalitha is over. It is now a question of whether she wants to pull out of the coalition in grace or disgrace.

Appeasing Jayalalitha was one of Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee's principal and painful preoccupations ever since he came to power in March 1998. The ADMK chief, known for her penchant to spring nasty surprises, kept the BJP on tenterhooks with one demand after another. The PM always went the extra mile to placate the second largest party in the 18-member coalition, despite misgivings among partymen. But the last set of impossible demands from Jayalalitha, spelt out during her five-day visit (March 26-30, 1999) to New Delhi, pushed Vajpayee back to the wall. Some BJP leaders were optimistic that the crisis would blow over, but this time the signals from ADMK headquarters in Chennai held more import than usual.

The latest bout of belligerence from the ADMK was seen in the backdrop of Jayalalitha's seven-minute meeting with Sonia Gandhi at Subramanian Swamy's tea party in Delhi the previous week. Many believed that Jayalalitha's added stridency stems from the fact that a deal has been brokered with the Congress.

Vajpayee's calculation, of course, was that Jayalalitha was only "using" the meeting with Sonia to up her ante; sabre rattling, if you will, and that the "mature thing to do is ride out the storm". But the fact was a large section of the BJP, led by L.K. Advani and including nearly the entire party hierarchy, was furious that they are being taunted at each turn by the ADMK supremo. Their discomfort at the public perception of their party as one willing to suffer all forms of humiliation to stay in power was growing ever stronger.

Like in the past, Vajpayee sought to cool tempers even at the cost of self-embarrassment. Jayalalitha had taken umbrage over Union power minister P.R. Kumaramangalam's remarks to the electronic media which amounted to asking her to quit the government if she did not agree with its decisions. Vajpayee was quick to bow to the ADMK's express demand that he dissociate himself from the statement and called it a "personal view". The PM's placatory statement was issued in less than an hour after the ADMK headquarters released a stinging statement signed by eight senior functionaries on April 1.

But tempers had not quite cooled in Chennai. Senior ADMK leaders held a meeting with Jayalalitha on April 2 at which, according to sources, it was informally decided that the party should demand a public apology from Kumaramangalam "for trespassing his limits". Said a senior party leader: "We know that Ranga (Kumaramangalam) made those statements at the behest of Advani. It was Jayalalitha who helped him win the Trichy seat and not Advani.We won't permit this go on."

It was also made clear that the party would pursue the case of former navy chief Vishnu Bhagwat's sacking. The idea was to make the going tough for the BJP when Parliament's budget session resumes on April 15—that was, if they were not provided enough reason to call a truce. "We'll take up the issues Jayalalitha raised in Delhi. There'll be no change in our stand," a senior party leader said.

To understand Vajpayee's cup of woes, one only has to look at the list of demands Jayalalitha brought to Delhi. Chief among these:

Reinstate Admiral Bhagwat or shift George Fernandes from the Defence ministry;

Move Vazhapadi Ramamurthy from the Petroleum ministry and swear in an ADMK nominee;

Induct two ADMK ministers to replace Sedapatti Muthiah and R.K. Kumar even if there is no cabinet expansion;

Conduct an inquiry against Sun TV and raid the premises of the proprietors, kith and kin of M. Karunanidhi;

Not accommodate MDMK in the cabinet;

Pull up Finance Minister Yashwant Sinha for citing MDMK leader Vaiko, instead of her, in the budget speech as the prime mover while clearing the Sethusamundaram project; (It is the same Jayalalitha who later opposed Sethusamudram project when the UPA government implemented)

Dismiss the DMK government.

Tough call, this. Giving in would mean Vajpayee had to go against the mood of his party and allies. Even his aides concede that the break would have to come sooner or later, unless the Congress lets Jayalalitha down with a thud. In fact, Vajpayee was known to be sceptical of the glib way in which sundry leaders of his party and coalition were insisting that the government would survive "even if Jayalalitha withdraws support".

That this a central calculation of the ADMK as well was quite clear. Though, as a senior ADMK strategist in Chennai said, "if Sonia refuses to align with us in a coalition or even for an election, there's no way we can file a case against her, you see". A section of the Congress was wary of having the situation spinning out of control—this was the school of thought that said "we only wanted to destabilise a government which was acquiring a degree of coherence". Others cited the fact that the high command has directed state units to organise rallies against alleged corruption in the defence ministry and the Bhagwat sacking as an indication that Sonia was serious.

But to get back to the BJP, Vajpayee was also put on the defensive by his own partymen. Says a leader who has been one of the most vociferous against the ADMK over the past week: "Our main ally hobnobs with the principal opposition, speaks of political earthquakes and changing equations being in the offing, threatens to withdraw support within one hour if the PM doesn't come to heel and nearly mentions the Congress by name as a prospective partner. And we do nothing!" This, some feared, might become a habit.

The refrain seemed to be that the interests of the party—and, in the long run, of the coalition—were being sacrificed. The riposte from Vajpayee's admirers was predictable: that the BJP is a political party which aims for power, and if it is not in power, it can't implement its promises. This thin line between tactical compromise and abject surrender reflects the divide within—one that seemed to have subsided lately, but sharpened all over again by Jayalalitha's antics.”

Although the government led by him fell ultimately, Vajpayee was the most relieved man. In exasperation Vajpayee said that the worst mistake committed by him in 50 years of his public life was aligning with Jayalalitha and vowed not to commit the mistake again in the rest of his life.

The attempts of Jayalalitha along with Subramanian Swamy to form an alternative government of the fall of the NDA government ended in a fiasco as the Congress as well as other parties including the Left parties were weary of forming a government in which Jayalalitha will have a say directly or indirectly. During the course of 13 months Jayalalitha was regularly issuing statements which were virulent attacks on the NDA government than the opposition parties. In fact her statements opposing Cauvery River Authority was verbatim carried from an article written by Congress leader Mani Shankar Iyer in ‘The Indian Express’ on the same day. Buoyed by the extensive coverage she got in the national media, Jayalalitha mistakenly thought that she was emerging as the national kingmaker.  But the people of the country gave her a fitting lesson by reelecting a BJP-led government with comfortable majority in the next election.

If for immediate political convenient any political party including the BJP dare to once again aligning with Jayalalitha in their itch for power forgetting the bitter experience of Vajpayee, people and the history will not absolve them.