BRP Bhaskar
Gulf Today
The consensus on national highways, hurriedly worked out by the ruling Left Democratic Front and the opposition United Democratic Front barely two months ago, has collapsed.
Strident voices for repudiation of the agreement to restrict road width to 30 metres and abandonment of the BOT (build, operate, transfer) formula are now being raised by leaders on both sides of the political divide.
The consensus was reached at an all-party meeting called by Chief Minister VS Achuthanandan in the wake of protests all along the major highways against acquiring land to increase road width to 45 metres.
Nine national highways run through the state. Together they account for 1,542km. The longest of them is NH17, which runs from Panvel in Maharashtra to Edappalli, near Kochi. About 420km of it lie in the state. About 417km of NH47, which links the Tamil Nadu towns of Salem and Kanyakumari, also lie in the state.
While national highways in other states were widened during the past two decades in keeping with the revised standards set by the Central government, Kerala could not do so for two reasons. One was the state administration’s reservations over some aspects of the Central policy. The other was the difficulty in acquiring land in view of strong opposition from the public.
The revised Central specifications fixed the width of the four-lane national highway at 60 metres. The state government urged the Centre to reduce the width to 30 metres in Kerala considering the heavy density of population. The Centre agreed to reduce the width to 45 metres.
Two months after the present LDF government took office in 2006 the government of India agreed to develop 868 kilometres of national highways in the state at a cost of Rs50 billion. However, the project could not be taken up because of the LDF’s reservations about the BOT formula. By the time LDF changed its mind, opposition to land acquisition became almost insurmountable.
On the basis of the decision taken at the all-party meeting, the chief minister led a delegation, which also included the Leader of the Opposition, to the Prime Minister in April and made a fresh plea to fix the road width at 30 metres.
When reports from New Delhi suggested that the Centre was not inclined to accept the request, Public Works Minister Jose Thettayil, who belongs to the breakaway Kerala Congress faction, broke ranks and came out against the consensus on 30-metre width.
Communist Party of India-Marxist state secretary Pinarayi Vijayan followed up with a suggestion that another all-party meeting be held to look at the matter afresh.
Since then a number of trade and civic organisations have come out opposing the move to reduce the width. Most of them want the government to stick to the figure of 45 metres, which was previously decided upon. Some want the state to fall in line with the national standard and go in for 60-metre wide highways.
Those favouring wider highways argue that there will be a bottleneck if road width in the state is fixed at 30 metres. They cite the state’s high vehicle population and the increasing incidence of road accidents to reinforce their demand.
In the eight years from 2001 to 2009, the number of vehicles in the state rose from 2.45 million to 4.88 million. However, multiplicity of vehicles rather than their number appears to be the major problem. Of the vehicles on the road, 2.92 million are scooters and motorcycles.
State Crime Records Bureau statistics show that poor driving standard is the main cause of road accidents. It attributed as many as 25,899 of 26,371 road accidents reported in 2009 to “fault of driver of motor vehicle”.
The need to facilitate fast vehicular traffic on the highways is not in doubt. Some groups agitating against land acquisition have offered a formula to end the impasse. This envisages construction of four lanes in 30 metres in the land already available with the government and construction of four more lanes on an elevated highway to be built by erecting pillars.
An elevated highway will, of course, involve higher construction costs. However, since there is no need to uproot people there will be saving in rehabilitation expenses. Any gap still left can be covered by collecting toll from users of the elevated highway. -- Gulf Today, Sharjah, June 7, 2010
Showing posts with label PINARAYI VIJAYAN. Show all posts
Showing posts with label PINARAYI VIJAYAN. Show all posts
Monday, June 7, 2010
Monday, May 17, 2010
LDF regime enters the last lap
BRP BHASKAR
Gulf Today
Kerala's Left Democratic Front government, which took office in 2006 amid infighting in the Communist Party of India-Marxist, enters the last year of its five-term term tomorrow (Tuesday), still hamstrung by lingering sectarianism.
Chief Minister VS Achuthanandan, who was subdued after his demotion from the Politburo as a disciplinary measure, has lately shown readiness to lock horns again with state secretary Pinarayi Vijayan who demonstrated his total control over the party machinery at the state conference in 2008.
Last week, the party leadership asserted its authority and reiterated its choice of state committee member CP Narayanan as the chief minister's political secretary, brushing aside Achuthanandan's objections. It also disapproved of his intervention to foil Industry Minister Elamaram Kareem's plan to speed up work on a four-lane road to an industrial estate at Kinaloor, which has met with popular opposition.
The government had its finest hour on the eve of its first anniversary when it concluded a deal with Tecom of Dubai to set up the Smart City project at Kochi. The chief minister's personal standing was also high at that time, thanks to the campaign he had initiated to reclaim lands grabbed by encroachers enjoying political patronage in and around the hill station of Munnar.
On the eve of the fourth anniversary, the government's image is dull. Not a brick has been laid at the Smart City site. With Tecom and the state government locked in a dispute over land title, the project is on hold. The Munnar operation was scuttled by local leaders of the CPI-M and the CPI.
The uneasy relationship between the chief minister and the party secretary limits the government's ability to refurbish its image in the last lap.
Last year's Lok Sabha poll revealed erosion of the ground support which had enabled the CPI-M and the LDF to register spectacular victories in the previous parliamentary, local bodies and Assembly elections. It is now preparing for the local bodies elections, due later this year, which will provide the next big test.
Outwardly the party has been projecting a picture of satisfaction at the government's performance. It attributed the electoral reverse to failure to convey to the people the state government's achievements, which included expansion of welfare measures and turning of loss-making public sector units into profitable undertakings.
According to the Restructuring and Internal Audit Board, the PSUs, which had incurred an aggregate loss of Rs696 million in 2005-06, yielded a profit of Rs2.32 billion in 2009-10. The turnaround was achieved by pumping in more than Rs2 billion and tying up some units with Central PSUs.
In view of the high level of unemployment in the state, one yardstick with which to measure its performance is its record on the job front. There was only a modest increase of 30,000 in the strength of the state's work force in the organised sector in the first two years -- from 1.10 million in 2006 to 1.13 million in 2008, the last year for which figures are available. The number of registered jobseekers went up from 4.0 million in 2006 to 4.5 million in June last year.
Finance Minister TM Thomas Isaac claims collection of commercial taxes has increased and the state's finances are in robust condition. He has secured financial stability by pushing up the debt burden from Rs459 billion in 2005-06 to an estimated 672 billion last year.
There are reports that Pinarayi Vijayan has voiced dissatisfaction at the performance of the government and some CPI-M ministers in a document prepared for discussion in party forums.
The government's lacklustre record must be viewed against the background of the dismal performance if all governments of the last three decades, during which the LDF and the rival United Democratic Front have alternated in power.
Essentially the Achuthanandan government's problem is one of poor image rather than poor performance. Its bid to give the police a people-friendly image has collapsed with a dozen police personnel facing murder charge in connection with a custodial death. There are allegations that it is shielding senior officers involved in this and other cases. Last week, policemen, ostensibly provoked by demonstrators, had gone on a rampage in Kinaloor.
On the education front, the government has bought peace by surrendering to the powerful private sector, dominated by the Christian Church, and on the administration of Hindu religious institutions it is seeking peace by giving in to the demands of the powerful Nair Service Society. -- Gulf Today, Sharjah, May 17, 2010.
Gulf Today
Kerala's Left Democratic Front government, which took office in 2006 amid infighting in the Communist Party of India-Marxist, enters the last year of its five-term term tomorrow (Tuesday), still hamstrung by lingering sectarianism.
Chief Minister VS Achuthanandan, who was subdued after his demotion from the Politburo as a disciplinary measure, has lately shown readiness to lock horns again with state secretary Pinarayi Vijayan who demonstrated his total control over the party machinery at the state conference in 2008.
Last week, the party leadership asserted its authority and reiterated its choice of state committee member CP Narayanan as the chief minister's political secretary, brushing aside Achuthanandan's objections. It also disapproved of his intervention to foil Industry Minister Elamaram Kareem's plan to speed up work on a four-lane road to an industrial estate at Kinaloor, which has met with popular opposition.
The government had its finest hour on the eve of its first anniversary when it concluded a deal with Tecom of Dubai to set up the Smart City project at Kochi. The chief minister's personal standing was also high at that time, thanks to the campaign he had initiated to reclaim lands grabbed by encroachers enjoying political patronage in and around the hill station of Munnar.
On the eve of the fourth anniversary, the government's image is dull. Not a brick has been laid at the Smart City site. With Tecom and the state government locked in a dispute over land title, the project is on hold. The Munnar operation was scuttled by local leaders of the CPI-M and the CPI.
The uneasy relationship between the chief minister and the party secretary limits the government's ability to refurbish its image in the last lap.
Last year's Lok Sabha poll revealed erosion of the ground support which had enabled the CPI-M and the LDF to register spectacular victories in the previous parliamentary, local bodies and Assembly elections. It is now preparing for the local bodies elections, due later this year, which will provide the next big test.
Outwardly the party has been projecting a picture of satisfaction at the government's performance. It attributed the electoral reverse to failure to convey to the people the state government's achievements, which included expansion of welfare measures and turning of loss-making public sector units into profitable undertakings.
According to the Restructuring and Internal Audit Board, the PSUs, which had incurred an aggregate loss of Rs696 million in 2005-06, yielded a profit of Rs2.32 billion in 2009-10. The turnaround was achieved by pumping in more than Rs2 billion and tying up some units with Central PSUs.
In view of the high level of unemployment in the state, one yardstick with which to measure its performance is its record on the job front. There was only a modest increase of 30,000 in the strength of the state's work force in the organised sector in the first two years -- from 1.10 million in 2006 to 1.13 million in 2008, the last year for which figures are available. The number of registered jobseekers went up from 4.0 million in 2006 to 4.5 million in June last year.
Finance Minister TM Thomas Isaac claims collection of commercial taxes has increased and the state's finances are in robust condition. He has secured financial stability by pushing up the debt burden from Rs459 billion in 2005-06 to an estimated 672 billion last year.
There are reports that Pinarayi Vijayan has voiced dissatisfaction at the performance of the government and some CPI-M ministers in a document prepared for discussion in party forums.
The government's lacklustre record must be viewed against the background of the dismal performance if all governments of the last three decades, during which the LDF and the rival United Democratic Front have alternated in power.
Essentially the Achuthanandan government's problem is one of poor image rather than poor performance. Its bid to give the police a people-friendly image has collapsed with a dozen police personnel facing murder charge in connection with a custodial death. There are allegations that it is shielding senior officers involved in this and other cases. Last week, policemen, ostensibly provoked by demonstrators, had gone on a rampage in Kinaloor.
On the education front, the government has bought peace by surrendering to the powerful private sector, dominated by the Christian Church, and on the administration of Hindu religious institutions it is seeking peace by giving in to the demands of the powerful Nair Service Society. -- Gulf Today, Sharjah, May 17, 2010.
Monday, July 13, 2009
CPI-M action to end sectarianism may not succeed
BRP BHASKAR
Gulf Today
THE die is cast. The Communist Party of India-Marxist (CPI-M) has finally taken a major step to rid its Kerala unit of the canker of sectarianism which has spread through its vitals. Given the unilateral character of the action, it is unlikely to yield the desired results.
All of Kerala waited with bated breath during the weekend as the 85-member party central committee, called at short notice, deliberated on the course of action proposed by the 15-member politburo, which could not come to an agreed conclusion the previous weekend.
People sat glued before television sets as the news channels organised live discussions on the issue on Saturday and on Sunday on the basis of unsubstantiated reports that emerged from time to time about the course of the deliberations at the party headquarters in New Delhi.
Fax messages supporting one leader or the other flowed into the party office from all over Kerala and from the Gulf states while the meeting was in progress.
The party has been afflicted by sectarianism since long. Matters came to a head at the 2005 conference at Malappuram, where the factions led by state secretary Pinarayi Vijayan and Chief Minister VS Achuthanandan (who was leader of the opposition at the time) clashed, ignoring General Secretary Prakash Karat's plea to accept an agreed list of candidates for the state committee.
The hesitant steps the national leadership took during the past five years failed to check sectarianism. The party's disastrous performance in the Lok Sabha elections forced it to acknowledge that the malaise that originated at the top had spread to the lower limbs.
The official assessment was that Achuthanandan's public voicing of opinions different from those of the party on issues like the Lavalin case, in which Pinarayi Vijayan figures as an accused, and the electoral pact with Abdul Naser Mahdani's People's Democratic Party, had contributed to the poll debacle.
It was this perception that prompted the leadership to recommend to the central committee to remove Achuthanandan from the politburo.
Although some members wanted action to be taken against Vijayan also, the committee eventually accepted the recommendation without any change.
The central committee's decision, undoubtedly, is a victory for Vijayan, since the state committee, which is under his control, was seeking action against Achuthanandan for breach of discipline.
But the Vijayan faction's sense of triumph is tinged by disappointment over the national leadership's refusal to concede its demand for Achuthanandan's removal from the post of chief minister. The state committee reportedly made the demand in two resolutions sent to the Politburo.
Demotion from politburo to central committee is a setback that Achuthanandan, who has invited disciplinary action in the past too, can take in his stride. For him, the greater blow is the national leadership's rejection of his contention that there was corruption in the Lavalin deal. It rejected his demand that Pinarayi Vijayan, as an accused in a corruption case, must be told to step down from the post of state secretary.
The politburo gave Pinarayi Vijayan a clean chit. It reiterated the earlier decision that the Lavalin case was politically motivated and that Vijayan was not guilty of corruption.
On earlier occasions the national leadership had taken care to convey the impression that it was holding the scales even between the two faction leaders. This approach was particularly evident when both Achuthanandan and Vijayan were suspended from the politburo for several months for indulging in a public spat.
On a superficial view, the national leadership may appear to maintain parity even now inasmuch as Achuthanandan and Vijayan have been allowed to remain chief minister and party secretary respectively.
However, considering the bureaucratic character of the communist machinery, demotion within the party further limits Achuthanandan's functional autonomy as chief minister, which was already severely circumscribed by the state party.
Since Achuthanandan values his image as a crusader against corruption, built up over the years, and Pinarayi Vijayan is unlikely to lessen the control he exercises over the government through his acolytes in the cabinet, the national leadership's fond hope that the two factions will work together is unlikely to materialise.
The spontaneous demonstrations at a few places and the opinions voiced by people in straw polls conducted by television channels are indicative of a surge in support for Achuthanandan in the wake of the disciplinary action against him.
This does not augur well for the CPI-M which has to face panchayats elections next year and Assembly elections the year after.
Gulf Today
THE die is cast. The Communist Party of India-Marxist (CPI-M) has finally taken a major step to rid its Kerala unit of the canker of sectarianism which has spread through its vitals. Given the unilateral character of the action, it is unlikely to yield the desired results.
All of Kerala waited with bated breath during the weekend as the 85-member party central committee, called at short notice, deliberated on the course of action proposed by the 15-member politburo, which could not come to an agreed conclusion the previous weekend.
People sat glued before television sets as the news channels organised live discussions on the issue on Saturday and on Sunday on the basis of unsubstantiated reports that emerged from time to time about the course of the deliberations at the party headquarters in New Delhi.
Fax messages supporting one leader or the other flowed into the party office from all over Kerala and from the Gulf states while the meeting was in progress.
The party has been afflicted by sectarianism since long. Matters came to a head at the 2005 conference at Malappuram, where the factions led by state secretary Pinarayi Vijayan and Chief Minister VS Achuthanandan (who was leader of the opposition at the time) clashed, ignoring General Secretary Prakash Karat's plea to accept an agreed list of candidates for the state committee.
The hesitant steps the national leadership took during the past five years failed to check sectarianism. The party's disastrous performance in the Lok Sabha elections forced it to acknowledge that the malaise that originated at the top had spread to the lower limbs.
The official assessment was that Achuthanandan's public voicing of opinions different from those of the party on issues like the Lavalin case, in which Pinarayi Vijayan figures as an accused, and the electoral pact with Abdul Naser Mahdani's People's Democratic Party, had contributed to the poll debacle.
It was this perception that prompted the leadership to recommend to the central committee to remove Achuthanandan from the politburo.
Although some members wanted action to be taken against Vijayan also, the committee eventually accepted the recommendation without any change.
The central committee's decision, undoubtedly, is a victory for Vijayan, since the state committee, which is under his control, was seeking action against Achuthanandan for breach of discipline.
But the Vijayan faction's sense of triumph is tinged by disappointment over the national leadership's refusal to concede its demand for Achuthanandan's removal from the post of chief minister. The state committee reportedly made the demand in two resolutions sent to the Politburo.
Demotion from politburo to central committee is a setback that Achuthanandan, who has invited disciplinary action in the past too, can take in his stride. For him, the greater blow is the national leadership's rejection of his contention that there was corruption in the Lavalin deal. It rejected his demand that Pinarayi Vijayan, as an accused in a corruption case, must be told to step down from the post of state secretary.
The politburo gave Pinarayi Vijayan a clean chit. It reiterated the earlier decision that the Lavalin case was politically motivated and that Vijayan was not guilty of corruption.
On earlier occasions the national leadership had taken care to convey the impression that it was holding the scales even between the two faction leaders. This approach was particularly evident when both Achuthanandan and Vijayan were suspended from the politburo for several months for indulging in a public spat.
On a superficial view, the national leadership may appear to maintain parity even now inasmuch as Achuthanandan and Vijayan have been allowed to remain chief minister and party secretary respectively.
However, considering the bureaucratic character of the communist machinery, demotion within the party further limits Achuthanandan's functional autonomy as chief minister, which was already severely circumscribed by the state party.
Since Achuthanandan values his image as a crusader against corruption, built up over the years, and Pinarayi Vijayan is unlikely to lessen the control he exercises over the government through his acolytes in the cabinet, the national leadership's fond hope that the two factions will work together is unlikely to materialise.
The spontaneous demonstrations at a few places and the opinions voiced by people in straw polls conducted by television channels are indicative of a surge in support for Achuthanandan in the wake of the disciplinary action against him.
This does not augur well for the CPI-M which has to face panchayats elections next year and Assembly elections the year after.
Wednesday, July 1, 2009
CPI-M is damned if it does, damned if it doesn't
B.R.P. BHASKAR
Comment
IANS
The Communist Party of India-Marxist (CPI-M) politburo meets July 5-6 to grapple with the worrying problem of sectarianism in its Kerala unit. Few political observers believe it is in a position to act decisively.
Ranged on either side of the divide are two politburo members - party state secretary Pinarayi Vijayan, 65, who has the organizational machinery in his grip, and Chief Minister V.S. Achuthanandan, 85, the only living party man from the state who was among the 32 members who walked out of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of India in 1964 to found the breakaway party.
Achuthanandan, who was state secretary from 1980 to 1992, played a big role in Vijayan's elevation to that post in 1998. But they quickly parted ways.
Early on, it looked as though Vijayan was trying to modernize the party to bring it in tune with the times and Achuthanandan was trying to hold it back in the Stalinist path. Soon, however, their public images changed.
When the Congress-led United Democratic Front was in power, Achuthanandan, as Leader of the Opposition, travelled to the remotest corners of the state and identified himself with popular causes, earning in the process the image of a man of the masses. Vijayan, who tightened his hold on the party and mobilized resources for the party's media and entertainment enterprises by tapping rich men of dubious background, came to be identified with the wrong kind of change.
The party's national leadership has been seized of the sectarian problem since 2005 when the two sides went in for a showdown, rejecting General Secretary Prakash Karat's plea to approve an agreed list of state committee members. The measures it has taken to put down sectarianism have not yielded results, mainly because it has been treating the symptoms, not the malady.
The state party leadership did not want Achuthanandan to contest the assembly elections but the politburo, responding to public demonstrations of support to him, allowed him to contest and become chief minister. The state party then effectively reined him in by packing the cabinet with Vijayan loyalists. With the politburo's help, it ensured that the chief minister did not keep the sensitive portfolios of home affairs and vigilance.
The national leadership has been at pains to give the impression that it holds the scales even between the feuding leaders. As they indulged in a public spat, it suspended both from the powerful politburo but allowed them to stay in their respective posts. The suspensions were withdrawn after a few months.
As the situation deteriorated, the national leadership adopted a policy of procrastination. There was no action on Achuthanandan's repeated requests for a politburo meeting to discuss state party affairs. Complaints from the two factions levelling charges against each other piled up at the party's headquarters.
After the party's disastrous performance in the Lok Sabha elections the national leadership could no longer look the other way. However, its election review was marked by self-righteousness rather than self-criticism. The Central Committee refused to acknowledge the damage caused by the party's brazen attempt of shield Vijayan from prosecution in the Lavalin case and by the alliance with Abdul Naser Mahdani's People's Democratic Party, which is widely seen as a communal outfit. It attributed the electoral debacle simplistically to the confusion caused in the public mind on these issues by the opposition, hostile media and a section within the party.
The politburo has before it two demands - one from the Vijayan faction seeking Achuthanandan's ouster from the chief minister's post and the other from the Achuthanandan faction for Vijayan's removal from the state secretary's post pending his clearance by the judiciary in the corruption case. Theoretically, it can accept either or both of these demands.
The national leadership is in the unenviable position of being damned if it does and damned if it doesn't. In taking a decision, it has to consider how its action will affect the Kerala party, which is its largest unit. If Achuthanandan is ousted, it will not be able to find a chief minister with comparable popular appeal. If Pinarayi is removed, it will be hard put to find an equally competent successor.
Party documents have revealed that about 10 percent of the full members and close to 25 percent of the candidate members in the state have been dropping out each year. Large-scale desertions, even when the party is in power, suggests deep disillusionment among the rank and file.
Despite a high dropout rate, the party continued to grow until 2006 thanks to the onrush of new entrants. However, in 2007, the last year for which figures are available, there was a net drop in membership. It fell from 341,006 in the previous year to 336,644.
Comment
IANS
The Communist Party of India-Marxist (CPI-M) politburo meets July 5-6 to grapple with the worrying problem of sectarianism in its Kerala unit. Few political observers believe it is in a position to act decisively.
Ranged on either side of the divide are two politburo members - party state secretary Pinarayi Vijayan, 65, who has the organizational machinery in his grip, and Chief Minister V.S. Achuthanandan, 85, the only living party man from the state who was among the 32 members who walked out of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of India in 1964 to found the breakaway party.
Achuthanandan, who was state secretary from 1980 to 1992, played a big role in Vijayan's elevation to that post in 1998. But they quickly parted ways.
Early on, it looked as though Vijayan was trying to modernize the party to bring it in tune with the times and Achuthanandan was trying to hold it back in the Stalinist path. Soon, however, their public images changed.
When the Congress-led United Democratic Front was in power, Achuthanandan, as Leader of the Opposition, travelled to the remotest corners of the state and identified himself with popular causes, earning in the process the image of a man of the masses. Vijayan, who tightened his hold on the party and mobilized resources for the party's media and entertainment enterprises by tapping rich men of dubious background, came to be identified with the wrong kind of change.
The party's national leadership has been seized of the sectarian problem since 2005 when the two sides went in for a showdown, rejecting General Secretary Prakash Karat's plea to approve an agreed list of state committee members. The measures it has taken to put down sectarianism have not yielded results, mainly because it has been treating the symptoms, not the malady.
The state party leadership did not want Achuthanandan to contest the assembly elections but the politburo, responding to public demonstrations of support to him, allowed him to contest and become chief minister. The state party then effectively reined him in by packing the cabinet with Vijayan loyalists. With the politburo's help, it ensured that the chief minister did not keep the sensitive portfolios of home affairs and vigilance.
The national leadership has been at pains to give the impression that it holds the scales even between the feuding leaders. As they indulged in a public spat, it suspended both from the powerful politburo but allowed them to stay in their respective posts. The suspensions were withdrawn after a few months.
As the situation deteriorated, the national leadership adopted a policy of procrastination. There was no action on Achuthanandan's repeated requests for a politburo meeting to discuss state party affairs. Complaints from the two factions levelling charges against each other piled up at the party's headquarters.
After the party's disastrous performance in the Lok Sabha elections the national leadership could no longer look the other way. However, its election review was marked by self-righteousness rather than self-criticism. The Central Committee refused to acknowledge the damage caused by the party's brazen attempt of shield Vijayan from prosecution in the Lavalin case and by the alliance with Abdul Naser Mahdani's People's Democratic Party, which is widely seen as a communal outfit. It attributed the electoral debacle simplistically to the confusion caused in the public mind on these issues by the opposition, hostile media and a section within the party.
The politburo has before it two demands - one from the Vijayan faction seeking Achuthanandan's ouster from the chief minister's post and the other from the Achuthanandan faction for Vijayan's removal from the state secretary's post pending his clearance by the judiciary in the corruption case. Theoretically, it can accept either or both of these demands.
The national leadership is in the unenviable position of being damned if it does and damned if it doesn't. In taking a decision, it has to consider how its action will affect the Kerala party, which is its largest unit. If Achuthanandan is ousted, it will not be able to find a chief minister with comparable popular appeal. If Pinarayi is removed, it will be hard put to find an equally competent successor.
Party documents have revealed that about 10 percent of the full members and close to 25 percent of the candidate members in the state have been dropping out each year. Large-scale desertions, even when the party is in power, suggests deep disillusionment among the rank and file.
Despite a high dropout rate, the party continued to grow until 2006 thanks to the onrush of new entrants. However, in 2007, the last year for which figures are available, there was a net drop in membership. It fell from 341,006 in the previous year to 336,644.
Monday, June 15, 2009
CPI-M sectarian drama set to move to politburo
BRP BHASKAR
Gulf Today
THERE were two conspicuous absentees when leaders of the Communist Party of India-Marxist (CPI-M) in Kerala assembled at Perinthalmanna for the EMS Namboodiripad birth centenary celebrations, with general secretary Prakash Karat in attendance.
Conceived as an occasion to pay formal tribute to Namboodiripad, the tallest leader of his time, the centenary function assumed special significance as it provided Karat an opportunity to set the tone for the crucial state committee meeting at Thiruvananthapuram and central committee and politburo meetings to follow in New Delhi later in the week.
As it happened, Chief Minister VS Achuthanandan and party secretary Pinarayi Vijayan, protagonists in the long-playing sectarian drama in the state party, were not present.
Achuthanandan is the CPI-M's senior most leader in the state -- he is the only survivor among the central committee members who had walked out of the undivided Communist Party of India (CPI) to found the party -- and, arguably, the most popular one too. He was not at Perinthalmanna because the state party leadership did not want him. It had assigned him no task there.
Pinarayi Vijayan is the party's most powerful leader in the state. He had demonstrated his hold over the party machinery in the organisational elections held in advance of last year's party congress.
He was not at Perinthalmanna because he had to rush home, cancelling all public engagements, to attend the funeral of his elder brother. In his absence, Karat performed the tasks assigned to him.
Significantly, Achuthanandan's exclusion from the function came in the wake of strident demands in the party's state secretariat by Vijayan's supporters that the politburo should take action against him for flouting party discipline.
There were reports that ministers loyal to Vijayan had informed the state leadership that they could no longer work with the chief minister. The ministers quickly denied them to obviate possible criticism that the principle of collective responsibility of the council of ministers had been violated.
Achuthanandan's most recent act that angered the state leadership was his refusal to endorse its stand that Governor RS Gavai had acted unconstitutionally in granting permission to the Central Bureau of Investigation to prosecute Vijayan in the Lavalin case.
In an interaction with the media, Achuthanandan not only refused to endorse the party's criticism of the governor but justified his action by pointing out that the Supreme Court has ruled that governors can use discretion in such matters and other state governors, too, have acted in like manner.
The state committee, in a statement, diluted its criticism of the governor's action, apparently to stay within the bounds set by the politburo, which only said it was "unfortunate." It also dropped the oft-repeated declaration that the party would fight the Lavalin case politically. Now that the matter was going to the court, the party would fight it legally, the statement said.
The softer tone signified a tactical move. The party continued with demonstrations against the governor. Addressing one such demonstration, Left Democratic Front (LDF) convener Vaikom Viswan, who is a central committee member, said that anyone who remained impassive on the Lavalin issue was an enemy of the party.
Although no names were mentioned, the attack appeared to be directed against Achuthanandan, who has refused to toe the party line, and the LDF constituents, who have kept away from the public campaign against the governor.
The state committees of the CPI and the Revolutionary Socialist Party, the only other leftist parties in the LDF, while criticising the governor for rejecting the ministry's advice on the prosecution issue, dissociated themselves from the CPI-M stand that the Lavalin case was politically motivated.
The demand for Achuthanandan's removal from chief minister's post is expected to be raised by Vijayan's supporters at the state committee meeting which Karat is due to attend.
The next act of the sectarian drama will be enacted in the politburo, of which both Achuthanandan and Vijayan are members. At its meeting, scheduled for Friday, the majority faction's demand that Achuthanandan must step down as chief minister or be removed is sure to come up. Achuthanandan is expected to demand that Vijayan, who is facing a corruption charge, must step down from the post of party secretary or be removed.
Karat has said the party will move forward, making "corrections" in the government and the organisation in the light of the electoral defeat. The crucial question is whether the party can sacrifice either or both of the feuding leaders.
Gulf Today
THERE were two conspicuous absentees when leaders of the Communist Party of India-Marxist (CPI-M) in Kerala assembled at Perinthalmanna for the EMS Namboodiripad birth centenary celebrations, with general secretary Prakash Karat in attendance.
Conceived as an occasion to pay formal tribute to Namboodiripad, the tallest leader of his time, the centenary function assumed special significance as it provided Karat an opportunity to set the tone for the crucial state committee meeting at Thiruvananthapuram and central committee and politburo meetings to follow in New Delhi later in the week.
As it happened, Chief Minister VS Achuthanandan and party secretary Pinarayi Vijayan, protagonists in the long-playing sectarian drama in the state party, were not present.
Achuthanandan is the CPI-M's senior most leader in the state -- he is the only survivor among the central committee members who had walked out of the undivided Communist Party of India (CPI) to found the party -- and, arguably, the most popular one too. He was not at Perinthalmanna because the state party leadership did not want him. It had assigned him no task there.
Pinarayi Vijayan is the party's most powerful leader in the state. He had demonstrated his hold over the party machinery in the organisational elections held in advance of last year's party congress.
He was not at Perinthalmanna because he had to rush home, cancelling all public engagements, to attend the funeral of his elder brother. In his absence, Karat performed the tasks assigned to him.
Significantly, Achuthanandan's exclusion from the function came in the wake of strident demands in the party's state secretariat by Vijayan's supporters that the politburo should take action against him for flouting party discipline.
There were reports that ministers loyal to Vijayan had informed the state leadership that they could no longer work with the chief minister. The ministers quickly denied them to obviate possible criticism that the principle of collective responsibility of the council of ministers had been violated.
Achuthanandan's most recent act that angered the state leadership was his refusal to endorse its stand that Governor RS Gavai had acted unconstitutionally in granting permission to the Central Bureau of Investigation to prosecute Vijayan in the Lavalin case.
In an interaction with the media, Achuthanandan not only refused to endorse the party's criticism of the governor but justified his action by pointing out that the Supreme Court has ruled that governors can use discretion in such matters and other state governors, too, have acted in like manner.
The state committee, in a statement, diluted its criticism of the governor's action, apparently to stay within the bounds set by the politburo, which only said it was "unfortunate." It also dropped the oft-repeated declaration that the party would fight the Lavalin case politically. Now that the matter was going to the court, the party would fight it legally, the statement said.
The softer tone signified a tactical move. The party continued with demonstrations against the governor. Addressing one such demonstration, Left Democratic Front (LDF) convener Vaikom Viswan, who is a central committee member, said that anyone who remained impassive on the Lavalin issue was an enemy of the party.
Although no names were mentioned, the attack appeared to be directed against Achuthanandan, who has refused to toe the party line, and the LDF constituents, who have kept away from the public campaign against the governor.
The state committees of the CPI and the Revolutionary Socialist Party, the only other leftist parties in the LDF, while criticising the governor for rejecting the ministry's advice on the prosecution issue, dissociated themselves from the CPI-M stand that the Lavalin case was politically motivated.
The demand for Achuthanandan's removal from chief minister's post is expected to be raised by Vijayan's supporters at the state committee meeting which Karat is due to attend.
The next act of the sectarian drama will be enacted in the politburo, of which both Achuthanandan and Vijayan are members. At its meeting, scheduled for Friday, the majority faction's demand that Achuthanandan must step down as chief minister or be removed is sure to come up. Achuthanandan is expected to demand that Vijayan, who is facing a corruption charge, must step down from the post of party secretary or be removed.
Karat has said the party will move forward, making "corrections" in the government and the organisation in the light of the electoral defeat. The crucial question is whether the party can sacrifice either or both of the feuding leaders.
Tuesday, June 2, 2009
Poll debacle brings CPI-M infighting to the fore
B.R.P.BHASKAR
Indo Asian News Service
The national leadership of the Communist Party of India-Marxist (CPI-M) will soon be called upon to adjudicate on the sectarianism in the party's Kerala unit, which has been laid bare by the electoral debacle.
The ruling Left Democratic Front led by the CPI-M, which held 19 of the state's 20 seats in the last Lok Sabha, has only four members in the new house. The CPI-M can derive comfort from the fact that all four are its nominees.
In an attempt to maximise the front's tally, CPI-M state secretary Pinarayi Vijayan had gifted the Muslim-majority Ponnani constituency to an independent candidate of People's Democratic Party (PDP) chairman Abdul Naser Mahdani's choice in return for his support in the remaining constituencies.
The Ponnani gamble failed but Mahdani claims credit for the CPI-M's four wins. The party's own assessment, disclosed after a series of state-level meetings, is that the deal with Mahdani did not yield the expected benefits. It reckons that the propaganda unleashed by the Congress-led United Democratic Front (UDF) and hostile media on the PDP link and the Lavalin scandal confused party sympathisers.
The party's association with the PDP may not have precipitated a Hindu backlash against it, but it appears to have helped the UDF by bringing about a consolidation of other Muslim groups behind it.
An accused in the Coimbatore serial bomb blast case, Mahdani was in a Tamil Nadu jail without bail or parole for nearly 10 years. After acquittal in 2007, he returned home a hero and resumed his self-appointed mission of weaning Muslims away from the Muslim League, a long-time UDF constituent.
Many viewed Mahdani's activity with suspicion as his campaign in the wake of the demolition of the Babri Masjid had aroused communal passions in the state in the 1990s. CPI-M leaders sought to dispel their fears by asserting he was a changed man.
To the party's embarrassment, the media carried a series of reports based on leaked contents of statements made to police by some terror suspects about contacts with Mahdani or his wife. Home Minister Kodiyeri Balakrishnan said the reports were based on old material.
The statements were indeed old, but the police had failed to follow them up. It was only after the elections that the police questioned Mahdani and his wife in the light of these statements. Apparently the police had deliberately delayed the follow-up action.
In the Lok Sabha elections of 2004 and the state assembly elections of 2006, the LDF could take the PDP's support without provoking any controversy. It became a matter of debate this time because it was seen as a prelude to the PDP's entry into the LDF.
The CPI-M has only itself to blame for the adverse impact of the Lavalin case. Pinarayi Vijayan was power minister when the state government gave the Canadian company, SNC Lavalin, a contract for modernisation of hydel projects. When the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) named him an accused, the party said the action was politically motivated. The party's state committee directed the chief minister to advise the governor against sanctioning prosecution by the CBI.
The governor, who can take a decision in the matter independent of the cabinet's advice, has not so far accepted or rejected the CBI's request. The length to which the party has gone to avoid Vijayan's arraignment in court has led to a suspicion that it has something to hide.
While identifying disunity in the LDF and the party as a factor that contributed to the electoral drubbing, the CPI-M has glossed over the causes of the disunity. It has also overlooked the role played by party rebels in its rout.
The CPI-M could pacify the Communist Party of India (CPI), which was angered by the allotment of its Ponnani seat to Mahdani's nominee, by offering Wayanad instead. However, the relationship between the two parties at the grassroots level remained strained, affecting the front's campaign.
The state leadership of the Janata Dal-Secular, which was infuriated by the CPI-M's takeover of its Kozhikode seat, openly backed UDF candidates in many places.
The decisions which annoyed the two LDF constituents were not taken in the normal course. They were taken unilaterally by the CPI-M leadership and imposed on the partners. Chief Minister V.S. Achuthanandan dropped broad hints about his differences with the party decision on both the seats.
Pinarayi Vijayan, while explaining the party's assessment of the electoral debacle, made an ominous reference to "breach of Leninist principles of party organisation". Although he did not mention Achuthanandan by name, he was clearly alluding to the latter's distancing himself from the party's stand on the PDP and Lavalin issues.
In the party forum Vijayan's supporters reportedly demanded Achuthanandan's resignation. One of them alleged that three years ago Achuthanandan had discussed with his aides a plan to float an alternative party.
The state leadership is likely to place these matters before the politburo, which alone is authorised to deal with charges against Achuthanandan as he is a member of that body. The politburo has to walk a tightrope, knowing that while Vijayan has complete hold on the organisation Achuthanandan commands popular support beyond the party.
Indo Asian News Service
The national leadership of the Communist Party of India-Marxist (CPI-M) will soon be called upon to adjudicate on the sectarianism in the party's Kerala unit, which has been laid bare by the electoral debacle.
The ruling Left Democratic Front led by the CPI-M, which held 19 of the state's 20 seats in the last Lok Sabha, has only four members in the new house. The CPI-M can derive comfort from the fact that all four are its nominees.
In an attempt to maximise the front's tally, CPI-M state secretary Pinarayi Vijayan had gifted the Muslim-majority Ponnani constituency to an independent candidate of People's Democratic Party (PDP) chairman Abdul Naser Mahdani's choice in return for his support in the remaining constituencies.
The Ponnani gamble failed but Mahdani claims credit for the CPI-M's four wins. The party's own assessment, disclosed after a series of state-level meetings, is that the deal with Mahdani did not yield the expected benefits. It reckons that the propaganda unleashed by the Congress-led United Democratic Front (UDF) and hostile media on the PDP link and the Lavalin scandal confused party sympathisers.
The party's association with the PDP may not have precipitated a Hindu backlash against it, but it appears to have helped the UDF by bringing about a consolidation of other Muslim groups behind it.
An accused in the Coimbatore serial bomb blast case, Mahdani was in a Tamil Nadu jail without bail or parole for nearly 10 years. After acquittal in 2007, he returned home a hero and resumed his self-appointed mission of weaning Muslims away from the Muslim League, a long-time UDF constituent.
Many viewed Mahdani's activity with suspicion as his campaign in the wake of the demolition of the Babri Masjid had aroused communal passions in the state in the 1990s. CPI-M leaders sought to dispel their fears by asserting he was a changed man.
To the party's embarrassment, the media carried a series of reports based on leaked contents of statements made to police by some terror suspects about contacts with Mahdani or his wife. Home Minister Kodiyeri Balakrishnan said the reports were based on old material.
The statements were indeed old, but the police had failed to follow them up. It was only after the elections that the police questioned Mahdani and his wife in the light of these statements. Apparently the police had deliberately delayed the follow-up action.
In the Lok Sabha elections of 2004 and the state assembly elections of 2006, the LDF could take the PDP's support without provoking any controversy. It became a matter of debate this time because it was seen as a prelude to the PDP's entry into the LDF.
The CPI-M has only itself to blame for the adverse impact of the Lavalin case. Pinarayi Vijayan was power minister when the state government gave the Canadian company, SNC Lavalin, a contract for modernisation of hydel projects. When the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) named him an accused, the party said the action was politically motivated. The party's state committee directed the chief minister to advise the governor against sanctioning prosecution by the CBI.
The governor, who can take a decision in the matter independent of the cabinet's advice, has not so far accepted or rejected the CBI's request. The length to which the party has gone to avoid Vijayan's arraignment in court has led to a suspicion that it has something to hide.
While identifying disunity in the LDF and the party as a factor that contributed to the electoral drubbing, the CPI-M has glossed over the causes of the disunity. It has also overlooked the role played by party rebels in its rout.
The CPI-M could pacify the Communist Party of India (CPI), which was angered by the allotment of its Ponnani seat to Mahdani's nominee, by offering Wayanad instead. However, the relationship between the two parties at the grassroots level remained strained, affecting the front's campaign.
The state leadership of the Janata Dal-Secular, which was infuriated by the CPI-M's takeover of its Kozhikode seat, openly backed UDF candidates in many places.
The decisions which annoyed the two LDF constituents were not taken in the normal course. They were taken unilaterally by the CPI-M leadership and imposed on the partners. Chief Minister V.S. Achuthanandan dropped broad hints about his differences with the party decision on both the seats.
Pinarayi Vijayan, while explaining the party's assessment of the electoral debacle, made an ominous reference to "breach of Leninist principles of party organisation". Although he did not mention Achuthanandan by name, he was clearly alluding to the latter's distancing himself from the party's stand on the PDP and Lavalin issues.
In the party forum Vijayan's supporters reportedly demanded Achuthanandan's resignation. One of them alleged that three years ago Achuthanandan had discussed with his aides a plan to float an alternative party.
The state leadership is likely to place these matters before the politburo, which alone is authorised to deal with charges against Achuthanandan as he is a member of that body. The politburo has to walk a tightrope, knowing that while Vijayan has complete hold on the organisation Achuthanandan commands popular support beyond the party.
Monday, May 18, 2009
Poll reverses set stage for fresh faction fight in CPI-M
BRP BHASKAR
Gulf Today
THE Left Democratic Front (LDF) has begun a review of the causes of its humiliating defeat in the Lok Sabha elections. As was expected, there are indications that the rout will aggravate factionalism in the Communist Party of India-Marxist (CPI-M), which leads the front.
The LDF, which had bagged 18 of the state's 20 Lok Sabha seats in 2004, could get only four this time. All four seats were won by the CPI-M. The CPI, which contested four seats, and the Kerala Congress (Joseph), which contested one, drew a blank.
Neither CPI-M state secretary Pinarayi Vijayan nor LDF convener Vaikom Viswan faced the media after the results became known on Saturday.
CPI state secretary Veliyam Bhargavan said the front's defeat was the result of a nationwide surge in favour of the Congress, which was seen as the most effective bulwark against the pro-Hindu Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP).
The CPI-M state secretariat put forward a similar explanation in a written statement. It also claimed the impact of the efforts of the United Democratic Front (UDF) and the ant-communist media to unify all anti-communist elements was also discernible in the Kerala verdict.
It added the party would look into the loss of some votes which the party and the front had traditionally received and take corrective measures in the working of the party and the LDF. During the long interval between polling and counting of votes, the state secretariat had called for reports from the party's lower units on possible vote losses.
The Pinarayi Vijayan faction, which controls the organisation, is expected to use these reports to take action against Chief Minister VS Achuthanandan's supporters for anti-party activities.
Findings by the lower committees that the Achuthanandan faction had neutralised party votes or even diverted them to the UDF would provide fresh ammunition for the demand for his resignation as chief minister.
Pinarayi followers had raised the demand at a recent meeting of the party state secretariat.
Achuthanandan, who talked to media persons after the results were declared, was asked whether he would assume responsibility for the election reverses "What for?" he asked.
He denied that the election results were a verdict against the state government.
In response to a pointed question as to who was responsible for the reverses, he said the Politburo and the central committee, which meet in New Delhi this week, would decide that.
On Sunday, the national leaders of the CPI-M and other Left parties met in New Delhi for a preliminary discussion on the outcome of the elections, which had dashed their hopes of playing a major role in the formation of the new government at the Centre.
The Congress-led United Progressive Alliance, which is only ten seats short of an absolute majority in the new Lok Sabha, is in a position to form a new government without the help of the Left, which anyway has been crippled by its losses in Kerala and West Bengal.
There are no doubt some common causes for the poor performance of the CPI-M and other Left parties in West Bengal and Kerala.
However, the reverses in Kerala have additional dimensions. They represent failure of Pinarayi Vijayan's policy of forging new alliances with parties of dubious background.
When former chief minister K. Karunakaran walked out of the Congress, Vijayan was keen to enter into an alliance with him. Achuthanandan, who opposed the move, was able to get the national leadership to scuttle it.
On the eve of the Lok Sabha elections, Vijayan struck a deal with People's Democratic Party (PDP) chairman Abdul Naser Ma'dani behind the back of the LDF partners.
Under the agreement, he gifted the CPI's Ponnani to an independent candidate of Ma'dani's choice in exchange for PDP's support in the remaining 19 seats.
The election results show that Vijayan's calculation that PDP help will help weaken the hold of the Muslim League in Malappuram district, has not worked out. The alliance with the PDP apparently alienated other Muslim groups from the party.
Unlike in West Bengal, the CPI-M faced a serious challenge in the state from members thrown out for anti-party activities. They worked against the party's candidates and put up their own candidates in some constituencies.
Achuthanandan is expected to draw attention to these factors and demand a change in the state party leadership. The party's national leadership, which is itself in the dock after the reverses, will not be able to meet his demand.
Gulf Today
THE Left Democratic Front (LDF) has begun a review of the causes of its humiliating defeat in the Lok Sabha elections. As was expected, there are indications that the rout will aggravate factionalism in the Communist Party of India-Marxist (CPI-M), which leads the front.
The LDF, which had bagged 18 of the state's 20 Lok Sabha seats in 2004, could get only four this time. All four seats were won by the CPI-M. The CPI, which contested four seats, and the Kerala Congress (Joseph), which contested one, drew a blank.
Neither CPI-M state secretary Pinarayi Vijayan nor LDF convener Vaikom Viswan faced the media after the results became known on Saturday.
CPI state secretary Veliyam Bhargavan said the front's defeat was the result of a nationwide surge in favour of the Congress, which was seen as the most effective bulwark against the pro-Hindu Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP).
The CPI-M state secretariat put forward a similar explanation in a written statement. It also claimed the impact of the efforts of the United Democratic Front (UDF) and the ant-communist media to unify all anti-communist elements was also discernible in the Kerala verdict.
It added the party would look into the loss of some votes which the party and the front had traditionally received and take corrective measures in the working of the party and the LDF. During the long interval between polling and counting of votes, the state secretariat had called for reports from the party's lower units on possible vote losses.
The Pinarayi Vijayan faction, which controls the organisation, is expected to use these reports to take action against Chief Minister VS Achuthanandan's supporters for anti-party activities.
Findings by the lower committees that the Achuthanandan faction had neutralised party votes or even diverted them to the UDF would provide fresh ammunition for the demand for his resignation as chief minister.
Pinarayi followers had raised the demand at a recent meeting of the party state secretariat.
Achuthanandan, who talked to media persons after the results were declared, was asked whether he would assume responsibility for the election reverses "What for?" he asked.
He denied that the election results were a verdict against the state government.
In response to a pointed question as to who was responsible for the reverses, he said the Politburo and the central committee, which meet in New Delhi this week, would decide that.
On Sunday, the national leaders of the CPI-M and other Left parties met in New Delhi for a preliminary discussion on the outcome of the elections, which had dashed their hopes of playing a major role in the formation of the new government at the Centre.
The Congress-led United Progressive Alliance, which is only ten seats short of an absolute majority in the new Lok Sabha, is in a position to form a new government without the help of the Left, which anyway has been crippled by its losses in Kerala and West Bengal.
There are no doubt some common causes for the poor performance of the CPI-M and other Left parties in West Bengal and Kerala.
However, the reverses in Kerala have additional dimensions. They represent failure of Pinarayi Vijayan's policy of forging new alliances with parties of dubious background.
When former chief minister K. Karunakaran walked out of the Congress, Vijayan was keen to enter into an alliance with him. Achuthanandan, who opposed the move, was able to get the national leadership to scuttle it.
On the eve of the Lok Sabha elections, Vijayan struck a deal with People's Democratic Party (PDP) chairman Abdul Naser Ma'dani behind the back of the LDF partners.
Under the agreement, he gifted the CPI's Ponnani to an independent candidate of Ma'dani's choice in exchange for PDP's support in the remaining 19 seats.
The election results show that Vijayan's calculation that PDP help will help weaken the hold of the Muslim League in Malappuram district, has not worked out. The alliance with the PDP apparently alienated other Muslim groups from the party.
Unlike in West Bengal, the CPI-M faced a serious challenge in the state from members thrown out for anti-party activities. They worked against the party's candidates and put up their own candidates in some constituencies.
Achuthanandan is expected to draw attention to these factors and demand a change in the state party leadership. The party's national leadership, which is itself in the dock after the reverses, will not be able to meet his demand.
Monday, April 13, 2009
Lavalin scandal in the poll campaign and beyond
BRP BHASKAR
Gulf Today
The Lavalin scandal did not figure prominently in the United Democratic Front's (UDF) election campaign, which is drawing to a close. That, however, does not mean the Left Democratic Front (LDF) can breathe easy.
Communist Party of India-Marxist (CPI-M) state secretary Pinarayi Vijayan's remark that the Lavalin issue has petered out is indicative of the party's satisfaction over the apparent success of party's bid to limit its electoral impact.
The case relates to a deal which Vijayan, as Electricity Minister in the last LDF government, had negotiated with the Canadian company, SNC Lavalin, for modernisation of some power stations.
The moment the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), which investigated the scandal, decided to arraign Vijayan, who is a member of the CPI-M politburo, as an accused in the corruption case, the party launched a propaganda offensive alleging the Congress-led government at the Centre was implicating him with a political motive.
Initially, the CPI-M had tried to pin the blame for the deal on the previous UDF regime, which had first signed a contract with Lavalin.
What the UDF government signed was a consultancy agreement, worth only Rs260 million.
Vijayan's negotiations resulted in a supply contract worth Rs 3.75 billion.
Loopholes in the new contract enabled the company to get away without fulfilling its contractual obligations.
The bid to discredit the CBI investigation as politically motivated was part of a calculated strategy to contain the fallout from the scandal. Another part of the strategy was to delay the government's response to the agency's request for permission to prosecute Vijayan and the former bureaucrats who figure in the list of accused.
The government could have acted quickly on the request after consulting the Law Department. But, acting at the party's instance, it decided to seek the opinion of the Advocate General.
A non-government organisation petitioned the high court in an attempt to speed up the process. The court allowed the government three months' time to take a decision. It also left the door open for the government to seek more time if necessary.
Chief Minister VS Achuthanandan, who is in a minority in the council of ministers, while talking to newspersons, made no effort to hide his displeasure over these developments.
By delaying a decision on the CBI's request for permission to prosecute Vijayan, the party was able to avert the possibility of his arrest before the election.
Half way through the campaign the UDF realised that the Lavalin issue had been pushed back by the controversy over the CPI-M's ties with Abdul Naser Ma'dani's People's Democratic Party (PDP), which hogged the most attention.
Although the alliance decided to push the issue to the top, its big guns did not highlight it in campaign speeches even afterwards. This was what prompted Pinarayi Vijayan to state that the issue had petered way.
The PDP issue also did much damage to the CPI-M. When it found that the camaraderie with Ma'dani was doing more harm than good, the party leaders stopped sharing the dais with him. They advised Ma'dani to campaign separately.
It will be wrong to presume that Lavalin became a non-issue in the election. It remained before the public throughout as lower level leaders of the UDF and the media harped on it all the time.
In retrospect, the CPI-M strategy appears to have misfired. The attempts to question the credibility of the investigative agency and delay the prosecution conveyed the impression that party had something to hide.
Whatever the opinion the Advocate General gives, the CBI will be able to go ahead with the prosecution of all accused, including Pinarayi Vijayan. On several occasions, the Supreme Court has stated that the CBI can go ahead with a corruption case even if government sanction is not forthcoming.
The agency approached the government for permission because it is charging the accused with criminal conspiracy, besides corruption. Even if the cabinet decides against granting permission to prosecute Vijayan, the governor can accord sanction.
There is also the possibility of some public interest group challenging the government's decision to refuse sanction for prosecution. It will then be for the court to take a final decision.
There is one scenario in which the CPI-M can stave off Pinarayi Vijayan's prosecution.
That hinges on the possibility of the emergence of a new central government, which is dependent upon on the party's support for survival and therefore willing to take a politically motivated decision to get him off the hook.
Gulf Today
The Lavalin scandal did not figure prominently in the United Democratic Front's (UDF) election campaign, which is drawing to a close. That, however, does not mean the Left Democratic Front (LDF) can breathe easy.
Communist Party of India-Marxist (CPI-M) state secretary Pinarayi Vijayan's remark that the Lavalin issue has petered out is indicative of the party's satisfaction over the apparent success of party's bid to limit its electoral impact.
The case relates to a deal which Vijayan, as Electricity Minister in the last LDF government, had negotiated with the Canadian company, SNC Lavalin, for modernisation of some power stations.
The moment the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), which investigated the scandal, decided to arraign Vijayan, who is a member of the CPI-M politburo, as an accused in the corruption case, the party launched a propaganda offensive alleging the Congress-led government at the Centre was implicating him with a political motive.
Initially, the CPI-M had tried to pin the blame for the deal on the previous UDF regime, which had first signed a contract with Lavalin.
What the UDF government signed was a consultancy agreement, worth only Rs260 million.
Vijayan's negotiations resulted in a supply contract worth Rs 3.75 billion.
Loopholes in the new contract enabled the company to get away without fulfilling its contractual obligations.
The bid to discredit the CBI investigation as politically motivated was part of a calculated strategy to contain the fallout from the scandal. Another part of the strategy was to delay the government's response to the agency's request for permission to prosecute Vijayan and the former bureaucrats who figure in the list of accused.
The government could have acted quickly on the request after consulting the Law Department. But, acting at the party's instance, it decided to seek the opinion of the Advocate General.
A non-government organisation petitioned the high court in an attempt to speed up the process. The court allowed the government three months' time to take a decision. It also left the door open for the government to seek more time if necessary.
Chief Minister VS Achuthanandan, who is in a minority in the council of ministers, while talking to newspersons, made no effort to hide his displeasure over these developments.
By delaying a decision on the CBI's request for permission to prosecute Vijayan, the party was able to avert the possibility of his arrest before the election.
Half way through the campaign the UDF realised that the Lavalin issue had been pushed back by the controversy over the CPI-M's ties with Abdul Naser Ma'dani's People's Democratic Party (PDP), which hogged the most attention.
Although the alliance decided to push the issue to the top, its big guns did not highlight it in campaign speeches even afterwards. This was what prompted Pinarayi Vijayan to state that the issue had petered way.
The PDP issue also did much damage to the CPI-M. When it found that the camaraderie with Ma'dani was doing more harm than good, the party leaders stopped sharing the dais with him. They advised Ma'dani to campaign separately.
It will be wrong to presume that Lavalin became a non-issue in the election. It remained before the public throughout as lower level leaders of the UDF and the media harped on it all the time.
In retrospect, the CPI-M strategy appears to have misfired. The attempts to question the credibility of the investigative agency and delay the prosecution conveyed the impression that party had something to hide.
Whatever the opinion the Advocate General gives, the CBI will be able to go ahead with the prosecution of all accused, including Pinarayi Vijayan. On several occasions, the Supreme Court has stated that the CBI can go ahead with a corruption case even if government sanction is not forthcoming.
The agency approached the government for permission because it is charging the accused with criminal conspiracy, besides corruption. Even if the cabinet decides against granting permission to prosecute Vijayan, the governor can accord sanction.
There is also the possibility of some public interest group challenging the government's decision to refuse sanction for prosecution. It will then be for the court to take a final decision.
There is one scenario in which the CPI-M can stave off Pinarayi Vijayan's prosecution.
That hinges on the possibility of the emergence of a new central government, which is dependent upon on the party's support for survival and therefore willing to take a politically motivated decision to get him off the hook.
Monday, February 9, 2009
CPI-M national leadership faces its severest test in Kerala
BRP BHASKAR
With faction leaders in Kerala fighting like Kilkenny cats, the Politburo of the Communist Party of India-Marxist (CPI-M), which meets in New Delhi this weekend, faces the severest test in its history.
The main item on its agenda is the Lavalin case, which relates to alleged corruption in a deal the State Electricity Board struck with the Canadian company SNC Lavalin when Pinarayi Vijayan was Electricity Minister. The Central Bureau of Investigation, which investigated the case, has named Vijayan, who is now the party's state secretary, as one of the accused.
This is the first time that a CPI-M Politburo member has figured in a corruption case.
The CBI decision to indict him came as he was preparing to lead a New Kerala march through the state's 140 Assembly constituencies to galvanise the party in advance of the Lok Sabha elections, expected in April.
As soon as the news broke, State Home Minister Kodiyeri Balakrishnan, who is also a member of the Politburo, charged the Central agency with implicating Vijayan in the case as reprisal for withdrawal of party support to the central government.
The next day the party's state committee adopted a resolution alleging the move to prosecute the party secretary was politically motivated. The central leadership quickly endorsed the charge.
Chief Minister VS Achuthanandan, who is the seniormost Politburo member from the state, flew to New Delhi apparently to make known to the national leadership his reservation in the matter.
As other party leaders railed against the CBI, Achuthanandan maintained silence, inviting criticism from the opposition and taunts from his own colleagues. When he broke his silence, he distanced himself from the party line and asserted he would only act in a manner consistent with the constitutional position that he holds.
Both Vijayan and Achuthanandan have made public statements which suggest that sectarianism in the party has reached the breaking point.
When Achuthanandan said he would not join the New Kerala march, Vijayan retorted, "All those who are in the party are in the march".
"A communist cannot be corrupt," Achuthanandan said later, clearly indicating that he wants Pinarayi Vijayan to get his name cleared to be counted as a communist.
The state party leadership believes Achuthanandan has violated party discipline by not accepting the Politburo's stand that the charge against Vijayan is politically motivated. It has sent a complaint to this effect to the central leadership.
Achuthanandan apparently holds the view that the Politburo has not taken a final position in the matter. The party's current position is based on consultations among available Politburo members. He wants a formal decision by the Politburo.
In a bid to distance the central leadership from the sectarian noises emanating from Kerala, general secretary Prakash Karat said on Saturday that the Politburo meeting, scheduled for Februart 14, has not been convened to consider any complaint. The Politburo was meeting since an issue concerning one of its members has arisen, he explained.
On a superficial view, the entire state party leadership stands behind Vijayan, and Achuthanandan is virtually isolated. However, a careful scrutiny of public statements by party leaders will reveal that not all of them are backing Vijayan with equal enthusiasm.
At one end are overzealous leaders who go so far as to suggest that Pinarayi Vijayan is the party, echoing the Emergency slogan "Indira is India". At the other end are circumspect leaders who say just enough to be counted among those who have endorsed the position taken by the leadership.
According to media reports, Achuthanandan wants Pinarayi Vijayan to be replaced as state secretary. This is not a demand that the central leadership can easily accept. With more than 336,000 members, the Kerala party is the largest unit, accounting for about 35 per cent of the CPI-M's countrywide membership. It is also a major source of funds for the party.
In last year's organisational elections, Pinarayi Vijayan tightened his grip on the party. His supporters now control party units and affiuliates at all levels. At the same time, Achuthanandan commands considerable goodwill at the grassroots level within the party and outside it.
The central leadership will have to summon all the tactical skills at its command to resolve the issue to the satisfaction of both the leaders. -- Gulf Today, February 9, 2009.
With faction leaders in Kerala fighting like Kilkenny cats, the Politburo of the Communist Party of India-Marxist (CPI-M), which meets in New Delhi this weekend, faces the severest test in its history.
The main item on its agenda is the Lavalin case, which relates to alleged corruption in a deal the State Electricity Board struck with the Canadian company SNC Lavalin when Pinarayi Vijayan was Electricity Minister. The Central Bureau of Investigation, which investigated the case, has named Vijayan, who is now the party's state secretary, as one of the accused.
This is the first time that a CPI-M Politburo member has figured in a corruption case.
The CBI decision to indict him came as he was preparing to lead a New Kerala march through the state's 140 Assembly constituencies to galvanise the party in advance of the Lok Sabha elections, expected in April.
As soon as the news broke, State Home Minister Kodiyeri Balakrishnan, who is also a member of the Politburo, charged the Central agency with implicating Vijayan in the case as reprisal for withdrawal of party support to the central government.
The next day the party's state committee adopted a resolution alleging the move to prosecute the party secretary was politically motivated. The central leadership quickly endorsed the charge.
Chief Minister VS Achuthanandan, who is the seniormost Politburo member from the state, flew to New Delhi apparently to make known to the national leadership his reservation in the matter.
As other party leaders railed against the CBI, Achuthanandan maintained silence, inviting criticism from the opposition and taunts from his own colleagues. When he broke his silence, he distanced himself from the party line and asserted he would only act in a manner consistent with the constitutional position that he holds.
Both Vijayan and Achuthanandan have made public statements which suggest that sectarianism in the party has reached the breaking point.
When Achuthanandan said he would not join the New Kerala march, Vijayan retorted, "All those who are in the party are in the march".
"A communist cannot be corrupt," Achuthanandan said later, clearly indicating that he wants Pinarayi Vijayan to get his name cleared to be counted as a communist.
The state party leadership believes Achuthanandan has violated party discipline by not accepting the Politburo's stand that the charge against Vijayan is politically motivated. It has sent a complaint to this effect to the central leadership.
Achuthanandan apparently holds the view that the Politburo has not taken a final position in the matter. The party's current position is based on consultations among available Politburo members. He wants a formal decision by the Politburo.
In a bid to distance the central leadership from the sectarian noises emanating from Kerala, general secretary Prakash Karat said on Saturday that the Politburo meeting, scheduled for Februart 14, has not been convened to consider any complaint. The Politburo was meeting since an issue concerning one of its members has arisen, he explained.
On a superficial view, the entire state party leadership stands behind Vijayan, and Achuthanandan is virtually isolated. However, a careful scrutiny of public statements by party leaders will reveal that not all of them are backing Vijayan with equal enthusiasm.
At one end are overzealous leaders who go so far as to suggest that Pinarayi Vijayan is the party, echoing the Emergency slogan "Indira is India". At the other end are circumspect leaders who say just enough to be counted among those who have endorsed the position taken by the leadership.
According to media reports, Achuthanandan wants Pinarayi Vijayan to be replaced as state secretary. This is not a demand that the central leadership can easily accept. With more than 336,000 members, the Kerala party is the largest unit, accounting for about 35 per cent of the CPI-M's countrywide membership. It is also a major source of funds for the party.
In last year's organisational elections, Pinarayi Vijayan tightened his grip on the party. His supporters now control party units and affiuliates at all levels. At the same time, Achuthanandan commands considerable goodwill at the grassroots level within the party and outside it.
The central leadership will have to summon all the tactical skills at its command to resolve the issue to the satisfaction of both the leaders. -- Gulf Today, February 9, 2009.
Monday, April 28, 2008
Kerala CPI (M) prepares trade unions to turn a new leaf
COMMUNIST Party of India (Marxist) State Secretary Pinarayi Vijayan's public denunciation of extortionist and corrupt practices of trade unions can be seen as part of a conscious bid to turn a new leaf and put Kerala firmly on the right path.
Speaking at a seminar to mark the golden jubilee of the State Assembly on Friday, Vijayan made a pointed reference to what is generally known as nokkukooli (which literally means "wages for looking on)." Without mincing words, he said collecting wages without working was robbery. Only those who worked were entitled to wages, he added.
Like bandh (forced work stoppage) and gherao (blockade), nokkukooli came into vogue as the CPI (M)-led Centre for Indian Trade Unions (CITU) resorted to strong-arm tactics in the 1970s.
Head-load workers, organised under CITU unions, asserted that they alone had the right to carry loads and they should get wages even if an employer engaged others for loading and unloading work. Today the practice of paying nokkukooli is prevalent in many commercial centres.
Besides CITU members, workers belonging to unions affiliated to other parties, like the Indian National Trade Union Congress and the Bharatiya Mazdoor Sangh, also collect unearned wages where they are able to do so.
Even as Pinarayi Vijayan was speaking against nokkukooli in Thiruvananthapuram, CITU and BMS workers at Thrissur were holding up road repair work because a contractor had refused to pay nokkukooli.
So long as nokkukooli was confined to industries and marketplaces, the general public was not very concerned about it. When the unions extended it to cover even ordinary citizens who took help for loading and unloading public opinion rose against it, but the people could do little.
During the Emergency, K Karunakaran, as the Home Minister, kept the militant trade unions under check using the police. When anti-Emergency sentiments swept the Congress out of power in most States, Karunakaran was able to lead it to power in Kerala in 1977. Many people attributed his electoral victory to middle class citizens' appreciation of the government's role in keeping the extortionist practices of workers in check.
The last United Democratic Front government had brought forward legislation to regulate the work of head-load workers with a view to saving ordinary citizens from exploitation. The CPI (M) vehemently opposed the measure.
In his speech, Pinarayi Vijayan also referred to the need for the Left Democratic Front and UDF to adopt a constructive approach to developmental problems. "The impression that if Oommen Chandy says something, Pinarayi Vijayan has to oppose it must go," he said.
UDF leaders' immediate response to Pinarayi Vijayan's speech was along familiar lines. Leader of the Opposition Oommen Chandy described it as a case of delayed wisdom. If the CPI (M) had taken this position ten years ago the State would have attracted much investment by now, he remarked.
LDF Convener Vaikom Viswan and Finance Minister TM Thomas Isaac quickly joined issue with them. Oommen Chandy's thinking was a century behind, Viswan quipped.
The exchanges showed that the traditional rivals would not find it easy to change their ways. After all, habits die hard.
Pinarayi Vijayan took up another issue, too, in his speech on Friday: the problems faced by ordinary citizens in government offices. He said it reflected poorly on the administration that even a small thing would not get done unless there was high-level recommendation.
People who approach government offices for certificates of any kind often have to pay bribes. However, Pinarayi Vijayan did not make any direct reference to such corruption.
The CPI (M) is the party which commands the widest following among both the working class and government employees. A determined effort by it to fight unhealthy trends can, therefore, go a long way in putting an end to evil practices.
Pinarayi Vijayan, who convincingly demonstrated his grip over the party machinery at the recent State conference, is in a position to bring about beneficial changes in the working of the State party as well as the mass organisations under its control.
Following Pinarayi Vijayan's speech, CITU State chief KN Ravindranath said the organisation was opposed to nokkukooli. He added that it would act firmly to put an end to it. --Gulf Today, Sharjah, April 28, 2008.
Speaking at a seminar to mark the golden jubilee of the State Assembly on Friday, Vijayan made a pointed reference to what is generally known as nokkukooli (which literally means "wages for looking on)." Without mincing words, he said collecting wages without working was robbery. Only those who worked were entitled to wages, he added.
Like bandh (forced work stoppage) and gherao (blockade), nokkukooli came into vogue as the CPI (M)-led Centre for Indian Trade Unions (CITU) resorted to strong-arm tactics in the 1970s.
Head-load workers, organised under CITU unions, asserted that they alone had the right to carry loads and they should get wages even if an employer engaged others for loading and unloading work. Today the practice of paying nokkukooli is prevalent in many commercial centres.
Besides CITU members, workers belonging to unions affiliated to other parties, like the Indian National Trade Union Congress and the Bharatiya Mazdoor Sangh, also collect unearned wages where they are able to do so.
Even as Pinarayi Vijayan was speaking against nokkukooli in Thiruvananthapuram, CITU and BMS workers at Thrissur were holding up road repair work because a contractor had refused to pay nokkukooli.
So long as nokkukooli was confined to industries and marketplaces, the general public was not very concerned about it. When the unions extended it to cover even ordinary citizens who took help for loading and unloading public opinion rose against it, but the people could do little.
During the Emergency, K Karunakaran, as the Home Minister, kept the militant trade unions under check using the police. When anti-Emergency sentiments swept the Congress out of power in most States, Karunakaran was able to lead it to power in Kerala in 1977. Many people attributed his electoral victory to middle class citizens' appreciation of the government's role in keeping the extortionist practices of workers in check.
The last United Democratic Front government had brought forward legislation to regulate the work of head-load workers with a view to saving ordinary citizens from exploitation. The CPI (M) vehemently opposed the measure.
In his speech, Pinarayi Vijayan also referred to the need for the Left Democratic Front and UDF to adopt a constructive approach to developmental problems. "The impression that if Oommen Chandy says something, Pinarayi Vijayan has to oppose it must go," he said.
UDF leaders' immediate response to Pinarayi Vijayan's speech was along familiar lines. Leader of the Opposition Oommen Chandy described it as a case of delayed wisdom. If the CPI (M) had taken this position ten years ago the State would have attracted much investment by now, he remarked.
LDF Convener Vaikom Viswan and Finance Minister TM Thomas Isaac quickly joined issue with them. Oommen Chandy's thinking was a century behind, Viswan quipped.
The exchanges showed that the traditional rivals would not find it easy to change their ways. After all, habits die hard.
Pinarayi Vijayan took up another issue, too, in his speech on Friday: the problems faced by ordinary citizens in government offices. He said it reflected poorly on the administration that even a small thing would not get done unless there was high-level recommendation.
People who approach government offices for certificates of any kind often have to pay bribes. However, Pinarayi Vijayan did not make any direct reference to such corruption.
The CPI (M) is the party which commands the widest following among both the working class and government employees. A determined effort by it to fight unhealthy trends can, therefore, go a long way in putting an end to evil practices.
Pinarayi Vijayan, who convincingly demonstrated his grip over the party machinery at the recent State conference, is in a position to bring about beneficial changes in the working of the State party as well as the mass organisations under its control.
Following Pinarayi Vijayan's speech, CITU State chief KN Ravindranath said the organisation was opposed to nokkukooli. He added that it would act firmly to put an end to it. --Gulf Today, Sharjah, April 28, 2008.
Friday, October 12, 2007
Pinarayi Vijayan vs M. N. Vijayan: who will be the ultimate winner?
ALL VIJAYANS are not winners. There are Vijayans who are winners and Vijayans who are losers. When two Vijayans are locked in struggle only one can win. So the other must lose. In a long drawn out war, there are many battles and there is a winner and a loser in each of them. The real winner then is the one who wins the last battle.
M. N. Vijayan and Pinarayi Vijayan came up winning battles in different fields. Pinarayi Vijayan won until he became Kerala State Secretary of the Communist Party of India (Marxist) and a member of the party’s Politburo. M. N. Vijayan won until he became the guiding force of the pro-CPI (M) art and literature organization, Purogamana Kalasahitya Sangham, and Editor of the party’s Deshabhimani weekly. While fighting their separate battles they were friends. When M. N. Vijayan took over as Editor of Padham magazine, which was attacking the CPI (M) leadership, even as he remained editor of the party publication, they became foes.
In the condolence message distributed to the media on M. N. Vijayan’s death, Pinarayi pointedly referred to his friendship and enmity with the party. He also certified that M. N. Vijayan was a distinguished college teacher. He saw in M. N. Vijayan no other quality worth mentioning. Pinarayi’s message prompted Advocate Jayashankar to speculate in a television programme on how the party State Secretary would remember Chief Minister V. S. Achuthanandan at some future date. He came to the conclusion that Pinarayi would describe him as “a distinguished tailor”. If Jayashankar had gone one step farther and tried to figure out how Pinarayi would be remembered at some future, the question that M. V. Devan asked might have come up. Unlike Devan, M. N. Vijayan never asked if Pinarayi had done a spot of work. In fact, in an interview published last year, he had evaluated Pinarayi in these words: “He had the capacity to organize workers. In those days Pinarayi Vijayan was the name of efficient organizational effort.” As for the present, avoiding personal references, he said, “We assess a person in politics by the political impact that he makes. Political effect is always a decisive factor. The persona is very irrelevant. Its place is elsewhere.”
The political effect of Pinarayi Vijayan and M. N. Vijayan needs to be studied. They reached the heights of left-wing politics through different routes. Pinarayi reached the top fighting his way up from the lowest levels. Entering public life without any special circumstances that favour him, he was ready to offer the sacrifices that the Communist Party demanded. Europeans had brought together Marx and Freud even before World War II. M. N. Vijayan attracted attention by doing that in Kerala. After attaining a high place in the cultural sphere, he made a lateral entry into politics. He then took up the task of tying up Malayalam literary and cultural activities with the CPI (M). Without being a party member, he became the party’s cultural commissar.
He did not hesitate to justify party men hacking a school teacher, who belonged to the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, in front of his pupils. He saw nothing wrong in burning to death the snakes of Pappinassery to settle scores with M. V. Raghavan. There was really no need for a person who demonstrated such loyalty to the party to quarrel with the party leadership. Yet he quarrelled. It was the feeling that the party was on the wrong track that led to it.
An organization must change with the times. The CPI (M) could not make timely changes because party minds had remained frozen at some point in the past. The political gains made by the leadership through tactical moves at a time when Kerala society was sliding backwards enabled the party to hide this fact. In the absence of any adversary with a modern face, this weakness did not become a big problem.
Pinarayi Vijayan entered the scene as a leader capable of leading the way for changes as a time when the need for changes was being recognized increasingly by the party and the public. But he soon came to symbolize the wrong kind of changes. Both friends and foes made their contributions to the transformation of his image in this manner. It was M. N. Vijayan’s role in this matter that prompted Pinarayi Vijayan to state that he was a fierce foe of the party in his last days.
M. N. Vijayan’s charges against the party leadership conveyed the impression that he wanted the party to remain unchanged. But, essentially, what he raised was a moral issue, not an ideological one. His quarrel was against the moral decline at the leadership level. Since he was not a party member, the leadership could not contain his revolt by expelling him or demoting him to a lower committee.
When he was a friend of the party, M. N. Vijayan could easily have got any post and position it could offer. But he did not become an Ezhuthachchhan Award winner, an academy chairman or a vice-chancellor. Because of that, he remains high above those who received such rewards.
M. N. Vijayan departed after winning a battle. He realized that it was not the final battle and went to the Press Club of Thrissur to sound the bugle for the next battle. Though he is no more, the war goes on. Hence the party leadership’s eagerness to pull him down from the high place that he had reached during his lifetime, drag him to his old college and tie him down there.
M. N. Vijayan’s revolt and the party's response to it have circumscribed left-wing thought in such a way that it looks as though Stalinism and capitalism are the only alternatives before us. This betrays the intellectual limit of those engaged in debates here. We must be able to understand that there are various possibilities outside them and explore them. In trying to figure out which Vijayan will finally win, we must keep in mind these words of M. N. Vijayan: political effect is the decisive factor; persona does not matter.
Based on column “Nerkkazhcha” appearing in Kerala Kaumudi dated October 12, 2007
M. N. Vijayan and Pinarayi Vijayan came up winning battles in different fields. Pinarayi Vijayan won until he became Kerala State Secretary of the Communist Party of India (Marxist) and a member of the party’s Politburo. M. N. Vijayan won until he became the guiding force of the pro-CPI (M) art and literature organization, Purogamana Kalasahitya Sangham, and Editor of the party’s Deshabhimani weekly. While fighting their separate battles they were friends. When M. N. Vijayan took over as Editor of Padham magazine, which was attacking the CPI (M) leadership, even as he remained editor of the party publication, they became foes.
In the condolence message distributed to the media on M. N. Vijayan’s death, Pinarayi pointedly referred to his friendship and enmity with the party. He also certified that M. N. Vijayan was a distinguished college teacher. He saw in M. N. Vijayan no other quality worth mentioning. Pinarayi’s message prompted Advocate Jayashankar to speculate in a television programme on how the party State Secretary would remember Chief Minister V. S. Achuthanandan at some future date. He came to the conclusion that Pinarayi would describe him as “a distinguished tailor”. If Jayashankar had gone one step farther and tried to figure out how Pinarayi would be remembered at some future, the question that M. V. Devan asked might have come up. Unlike Devan, M. N. Vijayan never asked if Pinarayi had done a spot of work. In fact, in an interview published last year, he had evaluated Pinarayi in these words: “He had the capacity to organize workers. In those days Pinarayi Vijayan was the name of efficient organizational effort.” As for the present, avoiding personal references, he said, “We assess a person in politics by the political impact that he makes. Political effect is always a decisive factor. The persona is very irrelevant. Its place is elsewhere.”
The political effect of Pinarayi Vijayan and M. N. Vijayan needs to be studied. They reached the heights of left-wing politics through different routes. Pinarayi reached the top fighting his way up from the lowest levels. Entering public life without any special circumstances that favour him, he was ready to offer the sacrifices that the Communist Party demanded. Europeans had brought together Marx and Freud even before World War II. M. N. Vijayan attracted attention by doing that in Kerala. After attaining a high place in the cultural sphere, he made a lateral entry into politics. He then took up the task of tying up Malayalam literary and cultural activities with the CPI (M). Without being a party member, he became the party’s cultural commissar.
He did not hesitate to justify party men hacking a school teacher, who belonged to the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, in front of his pupils. He saw nothing wrong in burning to death the snakes of Pappinassery to settle scores with M. V. Raghavan. There was really no need for a person who demonstrated such loyalty to the party to quarrel with the party leadership. Yet he quarrelled. It was the feeling that the party was on the wrong track that led to it.
An organization must change with the times. The CPI (M) could not make timely changes because party minds had remained frozen at some point in the past. The political gains made by the leadership through tactical moves at a time when Kerala society was sliding backwards enabled the party to hide this fact. In the absence of any adversary with a modern face, this weakness did not become a big problem.
Pinarayi Vijayan entered the scene as a leader capable of leading the way for changes as a time when the need for changes was being recognized increasingly by the party and the public. But he soon came to symbolize the wrong kind of changes. Both friends and foes made their contributions to the transformation of his image in this manner. It was M. N. Vijayan’s role in this matter that prompted Pinarayi Vijayan to state that he was a fierce foe of the party in his last days.
M. N. Vijayan’s charges against the party leadership conveyed the impression that he wanted the party to remain unchanged. But, essentially, what he raised was a moral issue, not an ideological one. His quarrel was against the moral decline at the leadership level. Since he was not a party member, the leadership could not contain his revolt by expelling him or demoting him to a lower committee.
When he was a friend of the party, M. N. Vijayan could easily have got any post and position it could offer. But he did not become an Ezhuthachchhan Award winner, an academy chairman or a vice-chancellor. Because of that, he remains high above those who received such rewards.
M. N. Vijayan departed after winning a battle. He realized that it was not the final battle and went to the Press Club of Thrissur to sound the bugle for the next battle. Though he is no more, the war goes on. Hence the party leadership’s eagerness to pull him down from the high place that he had reached during his lifetime, drag him to his old college and tie him down there.
M. N. Vijayan’s revolt and the party's response to it have circumscribed left-wing thought in such a way that it looks as though Stalinism and capitalism are the only alternatives before us. This betrays the intellectual limit of those engaged in debates here. We must be able to understand that there are various possibilities outside them and explore them. In trying to figure out which Vijayan will finally win, we must keep in mind these words of M. N. Vijayan: political effect is the decisive factor; persona does not matter.
Based on column “Nerkkazhcha” appearing in Kerala Kaumudi dated October 12, 2007
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)