As the ruling YSR Congress Party (YSRCP), the Telugu Desam Party (TDP), the Jana Sena Party (JSP) and the Bharatiya Janata Party prepare for the Andhra Pradesh elections scheduled next year, the government passed an order in early January which threatened to throw a spanner in the works of the Opposition parties. In the light of two stampedes claiming the lives of 11 people at road shows in the State, the government issued an order banning road shows and rallies on the grounds of public safety. The controversial order was met with anger from the Opposition parties. On January 13, a vacation Bench of the High Court said the order would be kept in abeyance until January 23. The State government has now filed a Special Leave Petition (SLP) in the Supreme Court challenging the stay imposed on the operation of the order.
The first stampede, which led to the death of eight people, took place during a roadshow addressed by former Chief Minister N. Chandrababu Naidu at Kandukur in Nellore district. The second took place at a private event in Guntur, apparently during a rush for freebies, and claimed the lives of three women. It was again Mr. Naidu who was the chief guest at that function.
Some Ministers and a host of YSRCP leaders held Mr. Naidu responsible for both the incidents, stating that his “penchant for publicity” had led to the loss of lives. They argued that Mr. Naidu’s convoy had passed through the narrow streets of Kandukur in blatant violation of police instructions. They said the organisers had failed to make proper arrangements, and the police could do little to control the surging crowds. YSRCP leaders also said it was the failure of TDP workers, who were involved in the distribution of gifts by a charitable trust, that led to the incident in Guntur. Opposition parties hit back at the government saying that the onus of preventing such incidents was on the police.
By issuing the order banning road shows and rallies, the government queered the pitch for the Opposition parties, which are seeking to cash in on the anti-incumbency factor through their mass outreach programmes. Mr. Naidu and JSP president K. Pawan Kalyan argued that the intent of the order was to stop them from reaching out to the people. They called it a British-era order designed to crack down on Opposition parties which are rallying together before the elections. The government dismissed these accusations and asserted that the order was applicable to all parties, including the YSRCP.
Before the political heat generated by the order subsided, Mr. Kalyan went into a huddle with Mr. Naidu at the former Chief Minister’s residence in Hyderabad for at least two hours. Mr. Kalyan is apparently at odds with his alliance partner, the BJP. He said he called on Mr. Naidu to express solidarity with him as the TDP chief was prevented by the police from conducting a roadshow in the Kuppam Assembly constituency days after the Government Order was issued and was finally forced to conduct door-to-door meetings. However, analysts say there is more to the meeting than meets the eye.
The Government Order is a mere restatement of the prohibitory orders routinely issued as per Section 30 of the Police Act of 1861, which empowers the imposition of reasonable restrictions whenever a situation requires on any given day. The fact that the Police Act was introduced by the British to tackle uprisings of the time has prompted the Opposition parties to term the order an archaic piece of legislation. There is nothing wrong with the Government Order, said a high-ranking official on the condition of anonymity; it merely means that permissions given for public meetings will be subjected to greater scrutiny by the police with the due involvement of District Collectors. In the SLP, the State government has said the High Court has failed to note that Section 30 of the Police Act allows the State to set up a procedure for permitting public meetings on the basis of applications filed by the organisers. Irrespective of the legal validity of the order, the ruling party and the Opposition will not compromise easily lest they be seen as losers even before the race begins. The courts’ verdicts on the order could likely impact future political meetings. The political ramifications notwithstanding, the police and parties should take adequate measures on safety ahead of any political gatherings in the future so that precious lives are not endangered.
