Spooking the Left

Left parties have, justifiably, prided themselves on two attributes: probity in public life and a secular, modern outlook that takes a particularly dim view of public religiosity. It cannot then be a very comfortable experience for these stalwarts to be confronted with growing evidence that the UPA8217;s presidential candidate appears to fail the test on both counts. As if Pratibha Patil8217;s opinion on Mughal rulers and veiled women was not bad enough, now come stories of dodgy banks, dodgy loans and dodgier relatives. There are even ghosts riding the swirling dust of the presidential election process: Pratibha Patil8217;s reported conversation with her long dead guru during a visit to the Brahma Kumari sect at Mount Abu.

All this may have been par for the course in parties far less scrupulous about their normative parameters. But for the comrades brought up on a diet of Marxian strictures against religion, it is important to be seen influencing the somewhat shambolic polity, given to capitalist corruption and irrational forces, for the better. They had until recently been vociferously congratulating themselves on having kept out of the contention candidates who did not meet their supposed high standards. Who would have thought that this demure, gentle, sari-clad lady could have proved to be so controversial? The raft of accusations that have followed in her wake is therefore unsettling in the extreme. And the Left is trying to disentangle itself from what is increasingly beginning to look like a fairly messy situation through some skilful distancing.

But the exasperation is showing. Earlier, Left leaders had tried to defend Patil amidst the growing din. Now CPM General Secretary Prakash Karat chooses to fob off all media queries about Patil by saying flatly, 8220;You should ask the Congress. They selected her.8221; This reluctance to shoulder the onerous responsibility of showcasing Ms Patil strikes a false note. The Left has never been particularly shy of laying down the line with the UPA, and doing so in a manner grossly disproportionate to its numbers 8212; its intransigent stand on the pension

reform bill being only a recent instance. So why, when it concerns the most important constitutional office, do its leaders choose to shrug their shoulders and look away?

Or is it a case of being spooked by Pratibha Patil8217;s dead baba?