MDMK leader Vaiko’s joys were short-lived.Three hours after a single-judge bench of the Madras High Court let him—after 17 months in prison—a day of freedom tomorrow to participate in the POTA debate in Parliament, the Jayalalithaa government challenged the decision and late tonight, the court reversed its order.The government’s appeal against Justice A Kulasekaran’s order was posted for hearing before a bench of Justice V S Sirpurkar and Justice N Kannadasan. The hearing, conducted at Justice Sirpurkar’s residence, began at 9.45 pm and the order was delivered shortly after 11 pm.The bench, noting that Vaiko had not challenged his custody (under POTA), held that a person under legal custody had no legal right to go to the Parliament.Earlier in the evening while granting the permission, the single judge had, however, said that Vaiko should not talk about his case or speak to the media.Laying down the conditions for the permission granted to Vaiko, Justice Kulasekaan had said that the MDMK leader should be taken straight from Vellore prison, where he is now lodged, to Chennai airport to take the first available flight out to Delhi.Vaiko should be permitted to stay at the Tamil Nadu house for a while, after which authorities accompanying him should take him to Parliament House and hand him over to the appropriate authority, who in turn should take him to the Speaker or Secretary-General of the Lok Sabha to participate in the debate and vote on the bill.During the hearing, in response to the judge asking him to show his ‘‘generosity,’’ the Advocate General had vehemently argued against giving any relief to Vaiko. But the judge gave both counsel 15 minutes to consult their clients and come back with clear instructions. After nearly half an hour, the AG came back to say: ‘‘They (the government) say it is not possible.’’Taking advantage of Vaiko’s counsel’s repeated argument that the MDMK leader was a victim of POTA and that he must be allowed to express his views in Parliament, the AG pointed out that Vaiko had already challenged Section 21(4) of POTA in the Supreme Court. He had also petitioned the central POTA review committee and was at the same time also facing trial in the Poonamallee special court. As such, the matter was sub judice and he should not be allowed to speak before various fora. And that he should not be allowed to avail of the immunity an MP is eligible for inside Parliament.
