The letter written by former Union Environment Minister, senior Congress party member and loyalist Jayanthi Natarajan (“ ‘ >I honoured Rahul’s requests ,’” Jan.30) exposes, more than anything else, the well-known fact that the Manmohan Singh government was “remote- controlled.” But what compelled Dr. Singh, a person of impeccable character and integrity, to submit to the wishes of the Congress’ first family, is a complete mystery. The letter shows that there must be a through investigation into all decisions made by the UPA.
K. Sivaraman,
Gummidipoondi, Tamil Nadu
Even when Ms. Natarajan resigned as Minister, there were many of us who were taken aback and felt there was more to it than met the eye. It is satisfying that Ms. Natarajan did not show favouritism and seems to have ensured that there were adequate safeguards to protect the environment. She might have been shifted out as she did not accede to “unusual requests.”
Krishnaswami K.R.,
Chennai
Well done, Ms. Natarajan. It’s time that people with integrity like her reveal the truth about the “inner policies” of political parties, irrespective of which party they belong to. For the public, this ensures transparency in decision-making and helps when voting.
Dhanush Kumar,
Bengaluru
Ms. Natarajan has been a loyal Congress member. One still remembers her shocked and stunned expression as seen in a photograph as she found the body of Rajiv Gandhi. It’s something that is seared into the nation’s collective psyche. The unceremonious manner in which she was removed from the Cabinet and then made a scapegoat for the general decision-making inertia of the UPA, shows the Congress in poor light.
Vishal Bondwal,
Faridabad
An uncomplaining, loyal spokesperson has been vilified by her masters. In many ways, this harsh treatment is typical of the Congress’s culture ever since Indira Gandhi came to power — when dynastic rule became the accepted norm and when great stalwarts were left in the lurch.
Shemeela Sasikumar,
Thrissur
One can understand the hurt sentiments of the senior leader. Political parties use the services of articulate leaders to attack political adversaries and then discard them like banana peels without realising the repercussions. One hopes that the Congress will accept its great loss in her departure as she is decent, speaks sensibly and puts across her viewpoints in a lucid manner without going overboard.
H.P. Murali,
Bengaluru
Ms. Natarajan cannot expect any public sympathy, having been one among the most assiduous of the numerous sycophants in the party who helped create the dynastic, autocratic, non-transparent and “can-do-no-wrong” command structure of the Congress. In any other party, its members have and can make sacrifices, But in the Congress, only the Family is allowed this privilege. Her letter is enlightening as it gives us rare and direct glimpses into the extra-constitutional power centre. Belonging to a party which has little following in Tamil Nadu, Ms. Natarajan has milked her claim to family legacy to the full, and can hardly lament that her “career” has been ruined.
A.N. Lakshmanan,
Bengaluru
It is amusing to see a trained lawyer bemoaning the lack of principles of natural justice in the party, when she had no scruples in violating her oath of office under the Constitution at the dictates of her extra-constitutional boss.
T.N.R. Rao,
New Delhi
Her defence over her rejecting projects lacks conviction, keeping in view her long-term association with the Congress and her image as one of its trusted lieutenants and conscience-keepers. If she did not subscribe to the Congress’s development agenda, she ought not to have been a member of the party, much less a Minister. It proves in hindsight that she was not ready for the post despite her long association. In one stroke she has spoiled her good name and reputation. She would have done better observing restraint.
A.V. Narayanan,
Tiruchi
It would have had more substance and conviction had she disclosed all this when it happened. Paying heed to “specific inputs” and “unjustifiable demands” just to be in the seat of power, and now crying foul when she finds herself out of the reckoning, is a cowardly act. There is a lesson here for political bosses too. They should not function in a whimsical manner, as exemplified by the abrupt and sudden transfer of the Foreign Secretary. There should be a method to making such decisions.
Vazuthur Raghavan,
Bengaluru
