Coming together

Sunday8217;s meeting, convened to discuss the implications of the Maharashtra government8217;s categorical rejection of the Srikrishna commission report, brought nine political parties together. This may be a small development but it is a significant one, especially when viewed against the growing uncertainty over the status of the ruling Vajpayee-led coalition. It would, of course, be premature to regard the meeting, convened by the Rashtriya Loktantrik Morcha, as evidence of an alternative ruling coalition in the making, but it nevertheless expressed the outrage that the Maharashtra government8217;s handling of the report has evoked in political circles.

Maharashtra Chief Minister Manohar Joshi8217;s cavalier labelling of the report as 8220;biased8221; and 8220;anti-Hindu8221; and his government8217;s refusal to seriously subject itself to the scrutiny and correction that Justice Srikrishna had recommended, were perceived by the participants of Sunday8217;s meeting as an attempt to rubbish an important public investigation and besmirch thereputation of the scrupulous sitting judge of the Mumbai High Court who had authored it. If the Maharashtra government now has to face political censure on a national scale, it has only itself to blame. Every inquiry report is meant to testify to a government8217;s commitment to protect the lives of its people. Indeed, inquiries of this kind are meant to make some amends 8212; feeble though they may be 8212; for the system8217;s inability to prevent such occurrences. It is this important principle that Joshi trampled upon in order to protect his party and, specifically, his mentor, Bal Thackeray, who was severely indicted by the commission for the role he had played in the riots that rocked Mumbai in late 1992/early 8217;93.

It is not just the Manohar Joshi government that has been singled out for criticism. By demanding that the Vajpayee government summon an urgent meeting of the National Integration Council on the issue, the nine-party group was clearly castigating the Centre for its apathy. After all, it was at theinitiative of the same Vajpayee that the Srikrishna commission got a new lease of life in May 1996, after the Maharashtra government had decided to disband it in January that year for asking uncomfortable questions about the role of Shiv Sena leader Madhukar Sarpotdar.

The Union government8217;s decision to support the Maharashtra government8217;s stand on the report was therefore perceived as a politically expedient move to save its coalition partner in Maharashtra. What must have caused a great deal of disquiet in ruling party circles over Sunday8217;s meeting is the fact that representatives of two of its coalition partners the AIADMK front and the National Conference attended the meeting, with the Congress having earlier organised a dharna outside Parliament on the same issue. For the moment, these developments are just straws in the wind, but the Vajpayee government at the Centre and the Joshi government in Maharashtra would be foolish to ignore the import of this mobilisation.