The Hindu : MPs, MLAs and videotape

Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Sunday, Mar 16, 2003

Opinion

Opinion - News Analysis

MPs, MLAs and videotape

The controversy has cast Uttar Pradesh politics in a turmoil. J.P. Shukla reports.

THE ALREADY vitiated political atmosphere in Uttar Pradesh has deteriorated further with the row over what have come to be known as the Mayawati tapes. The Samajwadi Party-led Opposition is making every effort to pull down the State Government led by the Bahujan Samaj Party's Mayawati, and the latter is countering the moves with equal ferocity.

The SP's trump card was the videotape of a recent meeting of BSP legislators and MPs where Ms. Mayawati allegedly urged them to donate funds to the party from the "commission" they received from the utilisation of their constituency development funds. On March 3, the SP leaders submitted the video recordings of the meeting to the Governor, Vishnu Kant Shastri, and urged him to ask the Chief Minister to resign or dismiss her.

Later, the SP leaders gave the tapes to a section of the media. Several newspapers termed the controversy, which has cast the State's politics in a turmoil, another "Tehelka" that had put Ms. Mayawati on the mat. The Chief Minister's response was prompt. Accepting that the tapes showed visuals of her party meeting, she said these related to February 2001 when she was out of power. Also, the tapes had been edited selectively and did not tell the whole truth, she alleged.

On March 4, the Opposition issued a notice indicating its desire to move a no-confidence motion against the Government. The aim was to prevent the Chief Minister from seeking any sudden sine die adjournment of the Assembly.

It was expected that in the wake of the instability created about the future of the coalition Government by the tape controversy, disgruntled MLAs from the BJP and the BSP would be willing to oppose the Government on the floor of the House. The Opposition's interest lay in continuing the atmosphere of uncertainty for a few more days. After the Speaker, Kesrinath Tripathi, announced that the motion would be admitted on March 5, the air of expectancy became more pronounced.

However, the ruling alliance quickly changed its strategy. The House, according to the programme fixed earlier, was to remain in session till March 7 but the Government decided to rush through the entire business, including the debate and voting on the no-confidence motion within a few hours. That spoilt the Opposition's plans.

The Assembly proceedings on March 5 did not bring glory either to the Government or the Opposition. For the first half of the day, the BSP members resorted to numerous protests against some personal remarks made by the Leader of the Opposition against a member of the party.

In the afternoon, the Opposition members fought with the House security staff in a bid to prevent the presiding officer from conducting the proceedings.

When the presiding officer put the no-confidence motion to vote, the SP members began shouting slogans from the well of the House.

Even after the motion had been carried by voice vote, they continued protesting and no one came to demand a lobby division on the issue. But all condemned the "undemocratic manner" in which the Assembly proceedings had been disrupted. That appeared to be more for public consumption.

The Assembly has adjourned but the fight continues. Ms. Mayawati has promised to conduct an inquiry into the mis-utilisation of the Chief Minister's discretionary fund during the tenure of the Mulayam Singh Yadav Government in 1995. She also announced that a massive rally would be held on April 14 to expose the SP-Congress conspiracy against her Government.

The language the two sides have used against each other during the past few days leaves little scope for any impartial debate.

Where all this will end is anybody's guess. Ms. Mayawati has for now protected her Government by taking a vote-on-account for six months of the next financial year.

Printer friendly page
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Opinion

Stories in this Section

A fund for the needy... or the greedy?

In the name of the people

MPs, MLAs and videotape

Unearthing the truth

A better deal for consumers

A directionless panel