• PAGE ONE
• INDEX
• HOME

Centre shows its ugly face

B. S. Raghavan

WHAT befell Ms Fathima Beevi, as Governor of Tamil Nadu, reminds one of the expressive Tamil proverb which says: The scorpion stings the coconut tree, but the neighbouring palmyra tree bears the agony!

In rubbing the nose of the Tamil Nadu Government on the ground for trampling upon the directives of the Union Government and the Supreme Court in its frenzied display of sadism and pursuit of vendetta in arresting Mr M. Karunanidhi, Mr Murasoli Maran and Mr T.R. Baalu, the Centre did most things right, but did one thing egregiously, and even childishly, wrong. And that was the cavalier treatment meted out to Ms Fathima Beevi.

A certain measure of brashness was expected from a young colt in politics like the Union Law Minister, Mr Arun Jaitley, who permitted himself some absurd and untenable ratiocinations justifying the summary dismissal of a former Supreme Court Justice with out even going through the motions of hearing her side of the case. What evokes surprise is that mature leaders such as the Prime Minister, Mr Atal Bihari Vajpayee, and the Home Minister, Mr L. K. Advani, who have many years in public life and politics t o their credit and who generally can be trusted to take a balanced and sober view of issues, allowed themselves to be stampeded into a course that threw to the eight winds all norms of fairness and natural justice.

After all, the commotion and contretemps created by the Tamil Nadu police while arresting Mr Karunanidhi and others, took place between 1-30 a.m. and 6 am on June 30, a Saturday. It is highly improbable that Ms Jayalalithaa, with her well-known penchant for brushing aside niceties coming in her way, would have either consulted the Governor in advance or briefed her subsequently about her decision to unleash the police hounds on Mr Karunanidhi or about the nature and course of events centering on the arr ests.

On the contrary, it is highly probable that the first time the Governor got to know of the deplorable developments was along with the rest of the populace, reading newspapers, listening to the radio or watching TV that morning. She, too, with her judicia l background and legal upbringing must have been overtaken by the same disbelief and dismay.

It is not reasonable on the part of Mr Vajpayee, Mr Advani and company to expect the Governor to write a monograph then and there for the simple and solid reason that she, in common with all other Governors, has no administrative or intelligence infrastr ucture, exclusively at her disposal, independent of the State Government, to collect facts and information. She has necessarily to depend on the State Government for such facts and information, unless the Centre expects her to operate her own intelligenc e set-up or to be on the prowl all over the State as a watchdog of the Centre to sniff out things for the purpose of preparing her reports.

Yes, once she has all the facts in her possession, she has the unquestioned right to interpret them according to her best lights and form her own opinion on their significance, implications and impact. It may well be that her opinion is totally at varian ce with that of the Chief Minister, the State Government or even the Centre. A Governor is neither the chattel nor the mouthpiece of any of them to be pushed around by them at will.

Unmindful of the short time -- less than a working day -- she had to collect, collate and study the situation in all its bearings and come to her own assessment, Mr Jaitley jumps to the ridiculous conclusion she was dilly-dallying wilfully. The Home Secr etary asks her peremptorily on June 30, as if she is at his beck and call, to send her report by 9 a.m. the next morning. It speaks volumes for Ms Fathima Beevi's forbearance and good nature that, instead of telling the presumptuous panjandrum where he g ot off, she hurriedly gets into a huddle with the Chief Secretary, the Director-General Police and others at the break of dawn to meet the deadline.

She forwards in good faith to the Centre what she could gather from officials who adorn the topmost slots as members of the IAS and the IPS, and whom she takes to be reliable, trustworthy and truthful functionaries of professional and intellectual integr ity, and not cringing, crawling toadies or touts of self-serving political bigwigs. Remember, the officers who appeared before her with papers and files tucked under their arms were newly installed in their respective chairs, and the Governor had had no means or time for appraising their suitability and temperament. Nor did she have any material that could have made her doubt their competence.

So, why did the Cabinet at Delhi advice the President to withdraw his pleasure from Ms Fathima Beevi in a manner that begs comparison with Ms Jayalalitha's own impetuosity vis-a-vis Mr Karunanidhi?

The Centre has only itself to blame for giving rise to all manner of unsavoury speculation in the minds of the people, and putting itself in an indefensible position. Is it that the Centre, forgetful of the high credentials of Ms Fathima Beevi as a forme r Supreme Court Justice, wanted her to send a report tailored to pander to its political prejudices and compulsions, and was incensed at her for not doing so? The Union Cabinet, and particularly, the Prime Minister, Home Minister and the Law Minister, ou ght to have known that she was under no obligation to toe their line, and if they had a different view of the facts and events in Tamil Nadu from their own sources, they should have had the moral courage to take the people into confidence and act accordi ng to the circumstances and needs as perceived by them, instead of booting the Governor out for not being their handyman.

Or, is it that the Centre bore a grudge against her dating back to the time she swore in as the Chief Minister someone whom Mr Vajpayee and Mr Advani had never forgiven for pulling down the previous BJP Government?

In either case, those whom the people have put in positions of power in Delhi can only be said to be giving vent to their baser feelings of peevishness, pettiness and vengefulness, much like Ms Jayalalithaa herself. It is a pity that the President, Mr K. R. Narayanan, with all his experience of administration and public affairs, did not give the Governor the protection needed and allowed himself to become a party to her unceremonious exit.