WORLD NEWS

The Puthuppally bypoll on Sept 5 and the looming Lok Sabha elections next year have roiled the political atmosphere in the state. Amid allegations and counter allegations — many of them uncomfortably personal — and charges of hidden agendas and unholy nexuses between the major players, Leader Of Opposition V D Satheesan talks to TOI on a range of issues:

It has been raining charges against the chief minister and his family members in the last few months. Why is the Congress unable to capitalise on these charges politically? Imagine what would have been the case if the UDF was in power and the charges were against the UDF chief minister and his family members.

The difference between LDF and UDF is the answer to your question. The supporters of UDF or the public in general do not approve of any kind of violent agitation or if we emulate the kind of agitation that the LDF resorts to if they are in the opposition. What is the role of the opposition? It is to expose the government. We are not here to topple the government as they have got the majority to govern for five years. Our role is to communicate, inform and then discuss these matters with the public after exposing the government. It is palpable that the discontent with the government among the general public is increasing day by day.

For the last six months, the chief minister has not been facing the media which itself is an answer that the allegations raised by the opposition in Kerala are genuine and true to facts. He is incapable of answering these charges. There are so many issues and new issues are developing every day.

Your position in the assembly was weak since the UDF did not raise the charges against the chief minister’s daughter in the assembly citing technical grounds. Even if your excuses can be accepted for not doing so, what stopped the UDF MLAs from at least raising banners or placards in the assembly when the charges with credible proof surfaced?

You should understand that we had just one day of the assembly session left when the charges against the chief minister’s daughter surfaced through the verdict of the income tax interim settlement board. It was very clear that we will not be able to raise this issue through a notice seeking an adjournment motion as rule 52 (5) clearly says that no such allegations can be made through an adjournment motion. Undoubtedly, we would not have been granted an opportunity to even raise the matter, let alone admitting it. Even the banners or placards could not have been raised to show the protest since the matter itself was not raised before the assembly. Our decisions in the assembly are taken in consultations with other leaders of the constituent parties and our MLAs. After serious consultations with all, we finally reached the conclusion that we cannot raise this matter through notice for adjournment motion but can be done only by raising corruption charges. Had we one more day’s session left, we would definitely have brought up this matter. At the same time, we also had another serious subject of custodial murder in Tanur to be raised in the assembly that day. Let me assure you, that when the assembly convenes on September 11, this matter will definitely be brought up with due seriousness.

But after your explanation on why the subject was not raised in the assembly, the very same day, Mathew Kuzhalnadan, MLA, tried to raise the matter. Wasn’t that an aberration from the general position of the UDF, if what you have explained is to be believed?

Not only Mathew Kuzhalnadan, no one can raise the matter during the process of legislation and in the history of the state legislative assembly, no one has been able to do so even if they wanted to. No one can raise the matter because the process of legislation was going on. Kuzhalnadan could not raise the matter. It was very clear that when the legislative process is going on, this matter cannot be raised. I challenge you to point out one example in the history of the assembly when such a matter was allowed to be raised during the legislative process. There are provisions in the rules of procedure to raise such matters. It should be done only then and we will bring it up accordingly.

You always have been alleging that there is a nexus between LDF and BJP to finish off Congress in the state and also that BJP is going soft on CPM. If that is true, how can you blame the public if they believe that UDF is also going slow on LDF since the names of UDF leaders also surfaced for accepting money from CMRL?

Yes, LDF and BJP are hand in glove when it comes to attacking Congress. But the charges that UDF and Congress are going soft on LDF are totally baseless. When you make such a statement, you should also consider that it was us who had raised as many as six serious charges against the chief minister and his government. Regarding the CMRL row, UDF will only intensify the attack against the government in the coming days, and not go soft. You should consider that UDF leaders have come out with clear explanations when their names surfaced in the order. When Oommen Chandy’s and Ramesh Chennithala’s names surfaced, the party itself clarified that both these leaders were entrusted to collect funds on behalf of the party.

If all those were party funds, will at least Congress be ready to come clean on the allegations against Ramesh Chennithala and Oommen Chandy with documents to prove that the money accepted was actually party funds?

The matter is at least 10 years old and it may be difficult to find documentary evidence for this. But when the party itself has given the clarification, what more does it require for proving their innocence? Political parties collecting money from entrepreneurs is not new or a secret. This is a company in which KSIDC has a stake. Only if we give any undue favours to them after collecting money, it would make a matter that can be challenged legally or morally. But the matter regarding the chief minister and his daughter are different which is self-explanatory from the order. The state’s public is learned enough to understand the difference between these two cases. The chief minister’s daughter’s case is worth attracting the provisions of the prevention of money laundering act. But neither the chief minister, nor his daughter and his son-in-law, who is also a minister, have given any logical explanation to the serious charges against them in the order. The chief minister has not even opened his mouth to the findings of the board or the charges levelled by the opposition.

Can you assure a victory in Puthuppally? And are you ready to take the brunt as the leader of the opposition if you lose Puthupally? Because the UDF losing Puthuppally will be considered a major achievement for the LDF in multiple aspects.

We will win the Puthuppally by-elections for two reasons. One is the Oommen Chandy factor. He had a special bonding with the people in Puthuppally. The next is that we are considering it as a platform to come up with a political campaign against the state as well as the Centre. So, we are placing all these charges against the government before the public. I will single-handedly own the responsibility if we lose here. Not only that, I am ready to bear the brunt if Chandy Oommen cannot increase the majority his father got in the previous elections. If we improve the margin, the credit will go to the leaders and workers in Puthuppally.

END OF ARTICLE