Deciphering Digvijay

According to Congress spokesperson Manish Tewari, 8220;Digvijay Singh has clarified that when he made the statement, he was alluding to certain reports that had appeared in a section of the media. The matter rests there.8221;

But this is not the first time that the senior Congressman8217;s intervention has cast the onus on his party to clarify its position on a sensitive matter. It has happened on at least three other occasions in the recent past: on the politically fraught matter of Afzal Guru, convicted in the 2001 Parliament attack case; on the controversy over the Batla House encounter; and most recently, on l8217;affaire Antulay.

8226; On September 20, Singh told The Sunday Express: 8220;Which Congressman ever defended Afzal Guru? It is his Constitutional right to appeal. His mercy petition is pending. There are bureaucratic and legal processes involved. No Congressman is opposed to the hanging of Afzal Guru.8221;

The statement appeared to defy the Congress8217;s official evasiveness on the hanging of the Parliament attack convict. The party has maintained its careful ambiguity in the face of the BJP8217;s persistent stoking of the issue, most recently during the campaign for the just concluded Assembly polls in six states.

If at all, the Congress has risen to the BJP8217;s bait in two ways: one, by pointing out that as home minister between 1998-2004, L K Advani did not take a decision on any of the clemency petitions pending before the Government, thus creating the present 8220;logjam8221;. And two, by reminding the BJP of its own role in the Kandahar-Maulana Masood Azhar episode in 1999.

8226; On October 1, Digvijay Singh said 8220;questions have been raised about the Delhi encounter which have to be addressed8221; even as he maintained that this matter was 8220;too sensitive for the party to take a political stand8221; in the absence of the complete facts.

This despite the fact that the city8217;s police comes under the Congress-led UPA, and the September 19 encounter, in which two alleged terrorists were killed along with a policemen, took place in a state run by the party8217;s government.

In this instance, Singh was joined by at least two other Congressmen 8212; Jamia Nagar MLA Pervez Hashmi and Union minister Kapil Sibal 8212; who also went public with their 8220;questions8221; about the encounter. Officially, the Congress has refused to support the demands for a separate judicial probe, pointing out that there is already an independent inquest by the SDM and the NHRC is also seized of the matter.

8226; Earlier this month, at a moment when both party and government appeared tongue-tied in the face of the political storm unleashed by Union Minority Affairs Minister A R Antulay8217;s remarks suggesting that the Malegaon probe had something to do with the death of Maharashtra ATS chief Hemant Karkare, Digvijay Singh said there was nothing 8220;objectionable8221; in what he said. 8220;What he Antulay has asked for is a probe into why Karkare was sent to where he lost his life. There is already a probe into it. What is objectionable in his statement?8221; he asked The Sunday Express.

Three days later, on December 23, Home Minister P Chidambaram told Parliament that questions about the circumstances in which Karkare was killed are 8220;deeply wrong and regrettable8221;.

8220;Each statement has to be evaluated in the context and circumstances in which it was made. It would be erroneous to discern a pattern,8221; says Manish Tewari.

It could be that Digvijay Singh is a questioning Congressman and the fact that he holds a senior position in the organisational hierarchy is a testament to the freedom of expression in the Congress. Given that in matters large and small, Congressmen and women either wait to take their cue from the high command, or genuflect to their estimate of what it might be, this is not a persuasive explanation.

Or, it could be the party actually sets him up to raise doubts about its own official version of crucial events. This theory takes off from the 8220;doublespeak8221; claim often made with regard to the Congress. It presumes not just that the Congress speaks in different voices, but also that it is in control of them all.

Or the former Madhya Pradesh chief minister is positioning himself in a rather unwieldy party.

After heading the state for two consecutive terms, Singh lost the 2003 election on bijli-sadak-paani issues to the BJP, but the spotlight has veered towards him regularly since. He8217;s been in the capital ever since 2003 but stories abound of his continuing imprint on the state8217;s intensely faction-riven politics. His critics say that Singh has covered the distance from chief minister to spoiler in Madhya Pradesh.

In the run-up to the recent Assembly elections that the Congress lost, Singh was at the centre of the 8220;unity show8221; organised by his party at Chhindwara 8212; where he proceeded to second Kamal Nath8217;s name for chief minister much to the consternation of the other MP satraps at the gathering. Then, his shadow loomed large in the selection of candidates.

But at the Centre in recent times, Singh has drawn attention to himself mainly on 8220;secular8221; issues, and particularly on 8220;Hindu terror8221;. On each occasion, Singh8217;s distinctive tone and tenor have meant that he can no longer be missed or mistaken for the anonymous voice of the Congress party.