It’s AAP’s Stalinist purge, dissenters are being targeted, says Prashant Bhushan

It has hurt me personally. But it is not so much a question of personal hurt. It is the fact that people whom I worked closely with and who I had supported have descended to such levels of resorting to blatant lies, resorting to fabrications, of resorting to all kinds of unethical and illegal means and now resorting to hooliganism and goondaism. That is what is most hurting. That even the minimum modicum of decency… For example, I didn’t actually see this because I was looking in front. I was sitting towards the front and I was looking at the front. But when this ruckus started towards the end of Arvind’s speech, his MLAs rushed to say: “gaddaron ko phek do, phek do”. They rushed towards my father because his speech was partly aimed at him. My father says he felt the same thing… it was like the one time he was attacked by dacoits and didn’t know if he would come out alive or not. So, what kind of MLAs, what kind of people have we bred? What kind of culture have we bred? And all this was on the instructions, planning and the full encouragement of Arvind. He himself instigated those people, he was there when this was happening. That is why I say that it has become like a Stalinist purge. The manner in which this purge is happening within the party, the manner in which they removed Anand Kumar, Ajit Jha, Yogendra Yadav and me and now the Lokpal himself. And now all these MLA’s that dissented are being targeted. It is like a Stalinist purge.

[related-post]

One of the things that they have questioned is that while the party never had the policy of one man, one post, it does have the policy debarring more than one person of a family holding a post. They say that your sister and father both held posts. How do you answer that?

It was that two members of a family can’t hold two executive posts. My father was not holding any executive posts, my sister was also not holding any executive posts. She was originally organisation development adviser which was not an executive post. She was thereafter AAP global team coordinator which was also not an executive post. She was not in any decision making capacity in the party, to make an executive decision. But it is really remarkable that the persons that are raising this issue and wanted to bring an amendment, that two persons of one family can’t even be invitees in order to prevent my father to be invited, are the same people who are most vociferously saying Arvind should continue to hold the post of Chief Minister as well as National Convener. The same people who clamoured for a Lokpal whose selection must not be left for the government are today saying they will themselves appoint their own Lokpal. Though our party constitution says the outgoing members of the Lokpal will appoint their successors. Quite apart from the fact that the Lokpal’s term was deemed to be renewed by the fact that he was being asked to function by the party as the Lokpal as late as in February. And under the party’s constitution, his term could be renewed for three years. But yet, when he become inconvenient, when they don’t want a neutral observer at the meeting, they tell him not to come, and they remove him because he has been receiving complaints about the conduct of the meeting itself. Then they proceed to appoint his successor without consulting him.

In the run up to the Delhi elections, while you had raised questions on 12 candidates, it is alleged that you worked against the party and told people not to donate, not to volunteer?

No, that is a misreading. I had said that I am not donating this time. You see, there was a whole history to all this. History was that there were institutional problems that one started seeing immediately after the Lok Sabha elections. It started with this attempt to form the government in Delhi immediately after the Lok Sabha elections with Congress support. Which we had opposed. Majority of the PAC opposed, and majority of the National Executive opposed. Arvind continued with that attempt and went to the extent, as the Rajesh Garg sting reveals, of asking people to break away six MLAs from the Congress party. The very six MLA’s whom he had himself accused of having bought over by the BJP for Rs 4 crore each. So he had become so desperate that he wanted to form a government in Delhi with the support of six bought over MLAs. Thereafter, there was this communal poster printed anonymously by the party that “Kaum ke gaddaron ne haath milaya” and when the party was caught with that, they then put up Amanatullah to take the flak for that and offered him the Okhla seat. Then came this issue of the SMS sent by AVAM, which was also sent by the party, but sent in the name of someone. Then came the issue of the party contesting the elections in Haryana and Maharashtra where in the National Executive, by a majority of 5-4, to allow the states to take their own decisions. But the decision was not allowed to be implemented. Then came this issue of candidate selection. Which, as I said, was completely non transparent, a departure from previous practices. Names were not put up on the site, and names and biodatas were not being sent to the PAC, which was the final approval body. Even when I asked for it, they were not being sent to me in advance. Then, when we objected to certain candidates, they stopped sending it to the PAC. And they got a lot of people as candidates who were pure political enterpreneurs, who had no ideological commitment. So you see at that stage I said look if this is how the candidates are being selected  I will have to resign from the party, and make public the reasons for my resignation. Which is what they are saying I threatened to hold a press conference. Yes, I did threaten them that if this is not redressed I will have to resign and resign publicly where I will have to give my reasons. At that stage an emergency meeting was held at my residence on January 4 in which I said all these things. And then it was agreed that all right, as a temporary thing, these complaints against the candidates would be referred to the Lokpal and these institutional issues would be taken up within two days of the elections by the National Executive. Meeting of the NE was delayed till February 26, but instead of taking up the issues of institutional reforms it started with Arvind saying that I am resigning because I want these two people out.

Prashant Bhushan had raised questions on the party’s functioning and was voted out of the Political Affairs Committee.

I asked you about what you had said to people at the time…

So I said that look I can’t campaign for these candidates. Eventually, I said I am willing to campaign for a few candidates amongst whom one of them — I had given the name of five  candidates — unfortunately was this Kapil Mishra, who was at the forefront of this hooliganism that day. It is really unfortunate. I had thought that since he had come from Greenpeace etc, he would be a decent guy, but he has turned out to be a lumpen. He has become Vice Chairman of the Jal Board and maybe now feels he owes this to Arvind to behave in this lumpen manner. So I had said that I am not willing to campaign for the other candidates except those whom I know are decent candidates. Therefore, I had mentioned five. But the party didn’t make out any programme. And eventually, I just went for a couple of meetings of this Pankaj Pushkar. When people used to ask me if I am campaigning I used to say I am not campaigning for these candidates. Firstly, because I am busy in the courts, I don’t have that much time. I have limited time for campaigning and I can’t campaign for these kinds of candidates.

The argument here is that while you stand for democratic processes, they did send the complaints to the Lokpal. The two people he recommended against were removed.

That was because there was very limited time for the Lokpal, he couldn’t even examine the assets. For example, Kartar Singh Tanwar. We had said in our complaint that he was a junior engineer in the Jal Board and yet he has seven farmhouses, five hotels and several apartments. Properties worth over Rs 1,000 crores. So therefore, the source of those assets needed to be investigated. But there was no time to do that. There was only four or five days for the Lokpal to complete his process. Therefore, they removed two against whom there was clear evidence, issued warnings against six against whom there was some evidence, and cleared four against who they found no evidence. But you see, those 12 were only those about whom information had come to us. There were many others about who no enquiries could be made at all because this time no transparency was followed.

Kumar Vishwas gave a speech at the National Council after you left and spoke about this difference between the elite and the grassroot worker. He said you had said there was a big difference between Naveen Jaihind and Yogendra Yadav and he interjected and said Jaihind was a leader because “vo danda khaata hai”. Is this one of those battles between the English speaking elite and the grassroot worker?

Certainly not. But if he means that as a lumpenism, then certainly it is a battle between civilised behaviour and lumpenism. If he feels that lumpenism can be justified by saying these people “lathi khaate hai”, then that can’t be tolerated. Laathi khaane vaale log zaroor ho sakte hai party mein, party maarne vaale nahi ho sakte (The party can have those who can take hits by a baton, but not those who wield it). You can’t have this behaviour tolerated in the party. We had received very serious complaints of misconduct and anti-party behaviour and yet he was being propped up and tolerated because he could be conveniently used to irritate Yogendra Yadav.

A lot of people in the party keep saying we respect Prashant Bhushan, but he has been taken in by Yogendra Yadav. That Yadav worked covertly to remove Arvind Kejriwal with that episode with Vijay Raman and making his own secratariat. What is your view?

Those are all lies. In my view, those are all lies. Vijay Raman has explained what was said in what circumstances etc. I have worked closely with Yogendra Yadav. There was never ever even a hint by him of removing Arvind and becoming National Convener and that is obvious from that sting tape. If you listen to that tape, this Umesh Singh is saying ki main unke saath kaam karta raha hoon, jaise aapke saath bhi kara hai aur main jaanta hoon ki voh aapko hataana nahi chahte, vo aapko help karna chahte hai, support karna chahte hai (I have worked with them, like I have worked with you, and I know that they don’t want to remove you. They want to help you, support you). If that had been false, Arvind’s first response would have been ki kya baat kar rahe ho, vo log to itne din se ye sab koshish kar rahe hai (What are you saying? They have been trying for so long). This is the lie that they they uttered that day that negotiations broke down because they were asking for Arvind’s removal. Total lie. This was never discussed. But instead of that he says that ye to sab gaddar hai, man inke saath nahi kaam kar sakta (They are all traitors, I cant work with them). This is what he is saying in sum and substance.

Why have you not resigned so far?

It is clear that I cannot work with Arvind and his coterie. That’s impossible now. They have stooped to such levels of lies, deceit, fabrication and all kinds of totally unethical behaviour and lumpenism. Its not possible to work with them anymore. A lot of volunteers are feeling so outraged that they want to retrieve this party. They are saying that this party is not Arvind’s property. What happened on that National Council is riddled with illegalities. Once can fight to regain control from Arvind and his coterie. But the question is whether it is going to be worthwhile or not. The party consists of a symbol, a name, property and volunteers. Volunteers in any case will go wherever they want to. Property is of no consequence. Name and symbol are the only issue. Whether one wants to fight for the name and symbol, a negative fight, is the issue for which we will have a convention where we will see what the majority feel, what consensus emerges. Speaking for myself, I am not in favour of entering into a fight even if we can regain the party from their control. I am not in favour of entering into a protracted fight in order to do that.

So personally, you are thinking of resigning?

Eventually it may come to that. We will see.

At one point in your press conference, you had said that you can call another National Council. What is the road to that? What are the specific violations of the constitution that you could take to the Election Commission or the court?

The fact that many National Council members were not called. Many were not allowed to come in. Many non-members were called. The conduct of the meeting was not according to the agenda. The agenda itself was not prepared by the National Executive. This resolution was moved by Manish Sisodia though he had not been permitted by the chair. He just took over the mike and moved this resolution. Without any seconding, he called for votes. There was no secret ballot. There was no independent videography allowed. The Lokpal was also not allowed to enter and watch the proceedings. Its riddled with illegalities. So one can certainly challenge this. There is no difficulty about that and I am sure than any court in a minute, court or Election Commission, will hold that this meeting was totally illegal. The question is, do you want to enter into all this?