kanchi-sathya.org - information on the kanchi seer, latest news on the the seer trial, facts about the kanchi mutt

OP ED IN DAILY PIONEER, 18/1

"Another victim of despotic design "

Bulbul Roy Mishra

In my article 'Seekers of truth and the ultimate lie' (December 7), I made the following two inferences. First, Ms Jayalalithaa's remark that the seer's arrest was the most painful decision in her entire political career was pretence. Second, there was no prima facie evidence to implicate the seer in the murder of Sankaraman. From the Supreme Court order of January 10, it is now patently clear that the Jayalalithaa Government has miserably failed to gather even prima facie evidence against the seer. The disputed, non-admissible custodial statement of the seer, even on its face value, revealed nothing more than the seer's anguish caused by the numerous accusing letters from the deceased. Besides, the statement that turned out to be the sole evidence for the prosecution was recorded only after the seer's arrest, thereby suggesting that the arrest was totally unfounded and hence unwarranted.

That Ms Jayalalithaa was neither pained nor repentant is evident from the arrest of the junior pontiff within hours of the release order for the senior, on the basis of the same pieces of evidence that the apex court denounced as untenable. Besides, her prayer to the apex court for deportation of Sri Jayendra Saraswathi from South India on the pretext that otherwise he would influence the investigation is unacceptable in the absence of prima facie evidence. It also fails the test of "equality before the law" as it amounted to her admission that he could not be treated on equal footing with other accused. If she was so convinced, why did she arrest him in the first place on mere suspicion sans evidence?

" I draw my inner strength from my belief in God," said Ms Jayalalithaa in an interview. She often spoke of her respect for Indian tradition. But Indian tradition teaches us to respect and not suspect a seer without evidence. Besides, robbing an honourable man of his honour amounts to killing him, as Lord Krishna told Arjuna during the Kurukshetra war. She deliberately ignored the seer's antecedents despite its importance in criminal law, and chose to rely on sketchy evidence, on the pretext of her fondness for secularism.

Not unaware of the historic importance and traditional value of the 2.5-millennium-old Kanchi Mutt, Ms Jayalalithaa knew that Shankaracharyas like the Dalai Lama are not elected but chosen. She was also aware that the seer's arrest was bound to shake the faith of millions of devouts, not only in the pontiff but also in the institution itself. In the above context, the treatment of the pontiff as ordinary criminals without an iota of evidence obviously turns the needle of suspicion to Ms Jayalalithaa herself. All the more so when she reportedly communicated to the Governor on January 15 that her Government was exploring ways to take over the Mutt. The motivating factor could be the enormous wealth of the Mutt, vote politics or personal affront to Ms Jayalalithaa on the hospital acquisition issue. But let us first delve into the antecedents of Ms Jayalalithaa herself.

Ms Jayalalithaa was arrested in 1996 on corruption charges during Mr Karunanidhi's rule. She went on record saying in an interview: "If someone gives me one blow, I will give 30." She proved it when at her instance, Mr Karunanidhi was physically lifted by her police force in the wee hours on June 30, 2001, throwing away all canons of decency. The Hindu editor dubbed this midnight operation as political vendetta. Justice VR Krishna Iyer wrote in The Hindu on July 2: "If allowed to run berserk, this authoritarian terrorism will make Bharat a bedlam." He warned: "One day any State Chief Minister with political limpets and police bullies may perpetrate a similar crime on our Prime Minister himself." Principal Sessions Judge, P Ashok Kumar, who granted bail to Mr Karunanidhi, observed that "the FIR itself was suspicious and the arrests questionable."

Ms Jayalalithaa's intolerance was evident once again in November 2003, when at her instance the Tamil Nadu Speaker sentenced the publisher and senior journalists of The Hindu and the editor of the Murasoli, a Tamil publication, to 15 days in prison on the charge that their articles committed breach of privilege. Herself suspected of engineering attacks on Ms Chandralekha (IAS), Messrs KM Vijayan and Shanmuganathan, both advocates, and beating up her personal auditor, it is farcical that she would venture to arrest the seer on the flimsiest charge of assault on some Mutt members without substance.

In my December 7 article, I hinted at the possibility of the murder being committed by elements inimical to the seer, capitalising on his well-known dislike for Sankaraman. This aspect also merits investigation. But it was not done. Was this neglect deliberate?

History is witness to the despotism of English monarchs despite the Magna Carta (1215) that guaranteed political liberties to the people. The Star Chamber (1341) that was set up to ensure speedy and fair enforcement of laws against powerful and prominent people later degenerated into a political weapon to punish opponents during the despotic rule of Henry VIII and Charles I. It was eventually abolished in 1641 after the people's revolt. Ms Jayalalithaa may draw her lessons from history. It is time for the Manmohan Singh Government to act tough, and transfer the case to the CBI without further delay. Should the country allow an autocratic Chief Minister to abuse the legal process for her own selfish end, reducing the rule of law into a "teasing illusion or promise of unreality" as Justice Krishna Iyer had put it?


	\| How Can I Help ? \| Site Search \| Photo Gallery \| Contact \|