Author: S.R. Ramanujan
Publication: Organiser
Date: November 28, 2004
URL: http://www.organiser.org/dynamic/modules.php?name=Content&pa=showpage&pid=52&page=4
When the Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister,
Dr Y.S. Rajasekhar Reddy allowed the Gujarat police to nab an alleged ISI
agent, Maulana Naseeruddin from Hyderabad and within a few days helped
the Tamil Nadu police to apprehend Kanchi Shankaracharya Jayendra Saraswati
from one of the Telengana districts, how can he or his police be faulted
for any partisan approach? Obviously not. His hands were 'tied' as revealed
by him as he had to uphold the rule of law.
But, it is not as fair as it appears.
A closer look will bring out the subtle difference between the two incidents.
Let us not forget the fact that in the case of Naseeruddin, the Gujarat
police succeeded in their third attempt to take him into custody; that
too, after having been forced to open fire in self-defence and in the process
killing an activist. The Andhra police was reluctant to extend any support
to the Gujarat police. Otherwise, the supporters (read agent provocateurs
of ISI lodged in Hyderabad's old city) of Naseeruddin could not have snatched
him away from the Gujarat police custody for some time. In the first attempt,
Maulana's supporters laid a siege to the Police Commissioner's office and
successfully prevented his deportation to Gujarat. This speaks volumes
about the extent of ISI network in Hyderabad city which could organise
a motivated crowd of thousands within minutes.
When some of the sants met Dr Reddy
in connection with the arrest of Kanchi seer, he is reported to have said
that everybody is equal before the law and law must take its own course.
This is not just Reddy's stand alone and he was only adding to the chorus
of other politicians and political parties. They are quite right. Rule
of law must prevail in a democracy and only then democracy can be alive
and kicking. But all these politicians owe an explanation to the people
as to why some were considered more equal before law and why law did not
take its course in many cases.
Let us take the case of actor Nandamuri
Balakrishna, son of late thespian N.T. Rama Rao. He allegedly shot at his
producer and his associate and critically injured them. Was the state police
allowed to interrogate him in custody even for an hour? He was completely
shielded by the powers that be and the medical profession, much against
the medical ethics. All sorts of alibis were created to prevent the police
from going anywhere near him. The Andhra Pradesh state administration collaborated
with the medical fraternity to ensure that the police was denied access.
Leading medical practitioners acted without any sense of shame. Only the
rule of law was put in acute medical care ward while the actor was undergoing
a 'massage' for his index finger which apparently had a sprain. The police
was also prevented from interrogating the actor because the latter was
under acute stress!
Sai Baba of Puttaparthi was definitely
considered above law by the then rulers when three youth were brutally
murdered in the bedroom of the Baba years ago. Did any police official
dare interrogate the Baba in police custody? There was strong circumstantial
evidence.
When the state government rolled
a red-carpet welcome, in the name of peace talks, to the hardcore Naxal
leaders on whose heads there were rewards of lakhs of rupees, what happened
to the rule of law? If an ordinary criminal surfaces like the Naxal leaders,
will the rule of law permit the government to extend five-star hospitality?
Did not the government throw to the winds the constitutional guarantee
of equality before law when it wanted to buy peace with the Naxals?
All this argument is not to suggest
that Kanchi Shankaracharya Jayendra Saraswati should not be taken into
judicial or police custody if there is clinching evidence against him in
connection with the murder of the ex-employee of the Kanchi mutt. This
is only to expose the double standards of those who are in public life
and some of the NGOs which are blatantly anti-Hindu. A Hyderabad-based
Human Rights Forum criticised the protest against the arrest of Kanchi
seer as meaningless and absurd. For them, human rights exist only for the
Left extremists or terrorists. If a Naxalite kills an innocent branding
him as an informant (and now the term is 'covert'), he has no human right.
When DMK leader, Muthuvel Karunanidhi,
was arrested and sent to jail and was served prison food by Jayalalithaa,
there was a hue and cry. When Shankara-charya was not allowed to cook his
own food in the Vellore jail where he is lodged, citing the jail manual,
'equality before law' was invoked. What happened to the 'equality' when
the now-expelled BJP-firebrand was lodged in a university guest-house because
it suited the ruling junta for political reasons? Sharad Yadav of JD(U)
also talks of equality. Any politician from Bihar cutting across party
lines cannot talk of law, let alone equality before law. All the politicians
of the state made Bihar a lawless state.
Will Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister,
Mulayam Singh Yadav, put his hand on his heart and say that there were
no murder charges pending against his ministerial colleague Raju Bhayya,
who was put behind bars under POTA by Mulayam's predecessor and who was
subsequently inducted into his cabinet? Was there a whimper against this
blatantly partisan action of cocking a snook at the Constitution and the
so-called rule of law? Raju Bhayya or his father were not certainly treated
equal before law. They are more equal before law.
We have another shining example
for the 'equality' clause getting out of shape when it comes to the Shiv
Sena supremo, Balasaheb Thackeray. Can those who are talking about the
rule of law explain as to what happened to the Sri Krishna Commission report?
For all his acts of omission and commission, has the law and order machinery
touched at least the tail of the tiger, let alone caging it? Those who
were implicated in the Tehelka scam were dropped and then taken back into
the cabinet citing people's verdict. Now the new law as people's verdict
can neutralise everything else, including the much-touted rule of law.
Others have to be strictly equal before law. Politicians are the only exception
before the rule of law.
(The writer is the former editor
of Newstime, Eenadu and director, Eenadu Television.)
