Opinion All about coal

The Organiser has published an article by senior BJP leader Arun Jaitley in which he argues that the UPA’s “process of allocation of coal blocks stinks” and demanded the prime minister to “accept the responsibility for what has happened” as the entire process was “arbitrary,discriminatory”.

While Organiser’s cover highlights “Manmohan’s dubious defence of Coalgate”,it is the editorial in Panchjanya which has voiced strong objections to the PM’s statement in Parliament,faulting him for attacking the CAG for its report. Terming the PM and his cabinet colleagues’ attempt to fault the CAG as “unfortunate”,the Panchjanya editorial expressed apprehensions whether the government wants a constitutional institution like the CAG to shed its autonomy and become an instrument to further the interests of the Congress in the same way as the CBI does.

Hanging in balance

The Supreme Court’s verdict upholding the death sentence to Mumbai terror accused Ajmal Kasab gets prominent space in Panchjanya. An article,“Judicial process complete,will the political process hold up hanging of Kasab?” says people want no delay in implementing the apex court’s verdict,but expresses fears as to whether the death sentence will be delayed by the political process. Contending that the trial of Kasab,right from the lower court to the apex court,bears testimony to the Indian judicial system before the world,the article reminds readers about the process whereby Kasab can seek a presidential pardon. The article expresses apprehensions that this political process may delay Kasab’s hanging,as it has done with Afzal Guru’s,convicted in the 2001 Parliament attack case.

“Had we hanged Afzal 10 years ago,there would have been no Ajmal Kasab and no 26/11,” the article argues.

Internet policing

ALTHOUGH the issue of the crackdown on internet pages and social networking sites,in the backdrop of alleged rumours spread to instil fear among the northeastern people,has subsided,both Sangh Parivar mouthpieces appear agitated about this alleged censorship.

The Organiser carried a couple of reports critical of the government,and also an editorial charging that a “terribly nervous” UPA government,in the backdrop of the CAG reports,has started “using underhand means to stifle public opinion” against it. In its editorial titled “Frightened UPA strikes back wimpish”,the Organiser has argued that it is “not the first time” the UPA has resorted to these tactics and reminds readers that earlier it had asked websites to filter content,claiming that some of it “tastelessly lampooned” Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and Congress president Sonia Gandhi. Claiming the content was “almost hundred per cent” related to issues concerning “corruption and dual power centres of the UPA”,the Organiser argues that “the government had no arguments to defend against the message of such comments and cartoon.”

The editorial reveals the Organiser’s provocation to write about this censorship: “It (the government) banned the Twitter [sic of people like Praveen Togadia” over allegations of being inflammatory. The editorial claims: “What is galling is that the attempt to gag the voices is directed to political criticism rather than communal disharmony”,and concludes the government is “resorting to censorship to cover up its sleaze and scandalous loot.”

Compiled by Ravish Tiwari