The Hindu : Front Page : “Jayalalithaa came to Assembly to create trouble”

Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Sunday, Feb 03, 2008
ePaper | Mobile/PDA Version

Front Page

Front Page

“Jayalalithaa came to Assembly to create trouble”

R.K. Radhakrishnan

AIADMK MLAs came running towards Speaker: Karunanidhi

M. Karunanidhi

CHENNAI: Chief Minister M. Karunanidhi told The Hindu on Saturday that AIADMK general secretary Jayalalithaa came to the Assembly with the intention of creating trouble because the session had gone off smoothly.

There was no trouble till the last day; till she came and began attacking persons of the stature of Perasiriyar [Finance Minister K.Anbazhagan] at a personal level. You were all there and what happened has been recorded by the cameras. Even after these provocative statements, Perasiriyar only replied to the charge. It was the AIADMK men who came running towards the Speaker’s chair,” he said when asked about the unpleasant events in the Assembly.

During the week-long session, the Chief Minister personally intervened on several occasions to request the Speaker to expunge portions of speeches and comments made by the ruling party members that the AIADMK members found objectionable. Once the remarks were expunged, the session went on smoothly and exchanges were largely confined to sharply criticising each other over performance.

MLAs who spoke on the motion of thanks for the Governor’s address from the AIADMK side found fault with the manner in which the DMK government handled the law and order situation and charged that many of the welfare schemes were not reaching the people. DMK MLAs responded by accusing the previous AIADMK government of lethargy and inaction and highlighted the many schemes of the DMK government. “You have been witness this whole week. Was there any problem” the Chief Minister asked.

Mr. Karunanidhi said the debate was on the motion of thanks for the Governor’s address. “Where did all these things that she spoke come from? Is this how a former Chief Minister speaks on such a motion,” he asked.

On the exchange over the title ‘Perasiriyar’ for his senior party colleague, Mr. Karunanidhi pointed out that it did not denote a formal academic designation such as ‘Professor’ or ‘Assistant Professor.’ Perasiriyar was an eminent commentator on Thirukkural and Anna [C.N. Annadurai] conferred the honorific on Mr. Anbazhagan out of respect for his scholarship and affection.

Asked about Ms. Jayalalithaa’s contention that he had misled the House through an incorrect citation of the Supreme Court’s judgment on POTA, Mr. Karunanidhi said he had got his facts absolutely right and wanted to convey the sense of the Supreme Court’s 2003 POTA judgment.

In this decision (AIR2004SC456), Justices S. Rajendra Babu and G.P. Mathur held as follows: “Offence under Section 3(1) of POTA will be constituted only if it is done with an ‘intent.’ If Parliament stipulates that the ’terrorist act’ itself has to be committed with the criminal intention, can it be said that a person who ’professes’ (as under Section 20) or ’invites support’ or ’arranges, manages, or assists in arranging or managing a meeting’ or ’addresses a meeting’ (as under Section 21) has committed the offence if he does not have an intention or design to further the activities of any terrorist organization or the commission of terrorist acts? We are clear that it is not. Therefore, it is obvious that the offence under Section 20 or 21 or 22 needs positive inference that a person has acted with intent of furthering or encouraging terrorist activity or facilitating its commission. In other words, these Sections are limited only to those activities that have the intent of encouraging or furthering or promoting or facilitating the commission of terrorist activities. If these Sections are understood in this way, there cannot be any misuse.”

Longer excerpts from the judgment are available at www.thehindu.com

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

Front Page