A more readable and abridged version of this article is published on www.scroll.in
The first political
reaction that played out on T.V screens, after the Supreme Court commutated
death sentences of three convicts in the Rajiv Gandhi assassination case on
Wednesday, was from MDMK General Secretary Vaiko.
The former Member of Parliament and well known Tamil Nadu politician
has been closely involved in the legal case of Rajiv Gandhi’s assassins. His
reaction was “This is a great victory and we now appeal for the release of
those in jail”. The almost immediate demand for the release of those, whose death
penalty was commuted only because of an ‘inordinate delay’ in carrying out the
execution, seemed to portray the verdict as an exoneration of sorts.
The very next morning,
in Chennai, Tamil Nadu Chief Minister J.Jayalalithaa made an announcement that
all seven convicts serving a life term in the case would be released and asked
the center to respond within 3 days. The political agenda is obvious for Jayalalithaa,
DMK chief M. Karunanidhi, Vaiko or every other Tamil politician, aspiring to be
the ‘champion of the Tamil cause’. In that quest, it does not seem to matter
that these are seven people, who had direct and indirect links to the LTTE and
were convicted in a monstrous crime. It was also as if their crime was lesser
than those committed by 96 other convicts serving life sentences for over 20
years in jails across the state.
The jubilation with
which the commutation was received and the vigor with which the demand for their release is
being pursued, has been described as “insensitive” to both the families of
those who died with the former Prime Minister and the fact that it was in every
way a crime against India. The simple
question is what has happened in Tamil Nadu over the last five or six years
that such demands are seen as the ‘unanimous wish’ of the state’s political
forces? Why is carrying out an execution in such an enormous case so difficult
and why should this be any different from the case of let us say an Afzal Guru?
A decade ago, in 2002,
Jayalalithaa’s government arrested Vaiko under POTA for making pro LTTE
speeches and he spent over a year in Jail. He was later arrested on charges of
sedition in 2008 by the DMK government. Several others who sympathized or
supported the LTTE, like Pazha Nedumaran, were arrested repeatedly and kept in
prison for prolonged periods of time. Ruling forces in Tamil Nadu acted against
those who offered support to the L.T.T.E and this was despite their ostensible
commitment to the Sri Lankan Tamil cause. The point is that there was a line
separating support for a terrorist outfit and sympathy for the Tamil cause. It
did not matter that the LTTE was the principal voice of the Sri Lankan Tamils,
it was a terrorist outfit and support to it was illegal in India.
That distinction was
alsothe corner stone of India’s foreign policy in Sri Lanka. While extending
humanitarian assistance and support for a political solution to the conflict,
India was categorically against the LTTE. Several Sri Lankan diplomats, on
condition of anonymity, have repeatedly insisted that “India’s categorical
support was of great importance to Colombo in eliminating the LTTE”. It is also
a documented fact that India abetted and aided the creation of the LTTE in the
late 1970s and 80s and there is a convoluted and intricate history before and
after 1991.There are many hardline activists in Tamil Nadu who shared a deep
emotional connect with the LTTE and despite the assassination continued to do
so. But, they neither dictated mainstream politics nor foreign policy.
Politics and political
decisions in Tamil Nadu had to be both cautious and circumspect while deciding
on issues relating to the LTTE or the Rajiv Gandhi case. In the year 2000, the
D.M.K government recommended the commutation of death sentence for Nalini
Sriharan. She was convicted on charges of providing logistical support to the
suicide squad. She was also pregnant at that time and it was after Sonia Gandhi
agreed to the commutation on humanitarian grounds that it was given. At that
time, the DMK did not take up the case of Santhan, Murugan or Perarivalan,
three others who were handed the death sentence. A well know journalist in Chennai added with
a touch of humour that “the wounds from the DMK’s indictment in the Jain commission
report on the Rajiv assassination case were still fresh and made them more
circumspect”.
Things began to change
in 2009 and the distinction between support for LTTE and support for Sri Lankan
Tamils became one in the state’s political theater. As India was battling out a
general election, in Sri Lanka the LTTE was in the last stages of a bloody
annihilation by the Sri Lankan army. The DMK was a firm part of the UPA and its
chief M. Karunanidhi, on the eve of an election, was under pressure to show
that he is not a ‘mute spectator’ to the war in Sri Lanka.
In this backdrop, in
an interview to NDTV, Karunanidhi called Prabhakaran a “Good Friend”. It raised several eye brows as Karunanidhi
was in an alliance with the Congress. He also went on a sudden fast in Chennai
which achieved little. Since 1991 the DMK had maintained a dubious impression
of sympathy for the LTTE but, were constrained by the fact that it was
unacceptable to Delhi, Indian law and main stream political forces to be seen
as sympathizing with a ‘terrorist
group’.
Almost as soon as the
Indian election results were declared on May 15th, in Sri Lanka news
of LTTE Chief Velupillai Prabhakaran’s death began emerging. Since then, all that one has seen in Tamil
Nadu is repeated reiterations of the serious allegations of ‘Genocide’ and
‘Ethnic cleansing’ by Sri Lankan forces. Pictures of the LTTE chief's son
Balachandran being shot in cold blood or those of atrocities committed by Sri
Lankan forces became huge rallying points.
As the sentiment grew
strong and horrible pictures from the war became clearer, there was genuine
disgust and sympathy for the Tamil plight and those mobilizing that sympathy
were groups that were pro-LTTE. One of the known activists, Thirumurugan Gandhi
even challenged a TV anchor during a debate and made an outrageous claim
that“if you call them terrorists then it is contempt of supreme court”. In
their narrative “The LTTE were martyrs and Prabhakaran was the ‘hamlet’”
Jayalalithaa,
who had taken a strong anti- LTTE stand till 2009, decided to enter the Tamil
cause bandwagon. She challenged Karunanidhi’s position as the tallest figure in
that political space and has played that agenda ever since she came to power in
2011. She ensured that Sri Lankan players could not play in Chennai during the
IPL, ensured the film Madras Café was not release in Tamil Nadu and now played
along in the demand for the release of the seven convicts. An AIADMK leader
says “It is a wise political move by Amma, if she did not do it immediately the
DMK would have galvanized a campaign for the release and would have taken
advantage”.
With the two main
Dravidian parties engaged in a race, what was once a fringe group agenda has become
dangerous and loud. The DMK was part of the UPA and began exerting pressure on
India’s foreign policy. India’s vote
against Sri Lanka at the UNHRC and subsequent cancellation of the PM’s visit to
Colombo for the CHOGM summit were all Indications of domestic political
pressure on India’s foreign policy. The irony is, in many ways, all these
demands were dictated by “pro –LTTE elements in the Sri Lankan Tamil
diaspora”.
While there is genuine anger against the plight of
Tamils, experts point out that the narrative has made it “impossible to
distinguish between the Sri Lankan Tamil cause and holding a brief for a
terrorist group or those convicted in a monstrous crime”. Unfortunately, the
main two political forces in Tamil Nadu are happy to play along.
Political
parties can dramatize and play along with irrational hard-line voices in their
political interest but, the deeper and more dangerous repercussions must not be
ignored. There is an attempt at distorting facts and history. It is the responsibility of the two main
parties in Tamil Nadu and the central government to dictate the levels of
acceptability. While commutation of death penalty shows the humanitarian side
and upholds the spirit of the law, making that the platform for the release of
the convicts is unacceptable. The onus
is on the principal political parties in Tamil Nadu to define and re iterate
the line between supporting Sri Lankan Tamils and idolizing a terrorist act.
No comments:
Post a Comment