Stalin urges President to remove R N Ravi as Tamil Nadu Governor: ‘Incited communal hatred, is a threat to peace in state’

The CM called Ravi “unfit for the office of Governor” and requested the President to “consider removing him from the high constitutional position” due to his “political bias, hasty actions, and incitement of communal hatred”. He alleged that Ravi’s “actions show his extraordinary animosity towards Tamil Nadu as well as defaming the name Tamil Nadu”, which was the name bestowed by the state’s first CM and DMK founder C N Annadurai. The Tamil Nadu CM said he would leave it to the President to decide on extending Ravi’s term.

Alleging that the Governor is “evidently a person who bears a deep-rooted enmity against Tamil Nadu, the Tamil people, and Tamil culture”, Stalin told the President that Ravi’s comments and speeches were “not only obstructing the democratically elected government but also provoking disdain, contempt, and hostility towards the law of the land”.

The CM accused the Governor of being “involved in ideological and political conflict with the democratically elected DMK government” since assuming office in September 2021, listing several examples. The Governor’s actions, the government statement said, had caused distress and hindered the government’s functioning.

The CM raised concerns about unnecessary delays in approving Bills passed by the Assembly. Emphasising that a Governor needs to act within the constitutional framework and not “misuse their lack of time limit for giving consent to Bills”, Stalin said Ravi’s interference amounts to an “administrative anomaly”. The letter mentioned the dispute over minister V Senthil Balaji who was dismissed by the Governor last month following his arrest in a corruption case. Ravi withdrew the order after a few hours. The CM said that “the Governor’s recommendation of this nature is against the law”.

Among other things, Stalin accused the Governor of delaying permission to proceed with corruption cases against ministers in the previous AIADMK government, including in the Gutkha scam. Stalin said it was unusual for the Governor to “withhold permission in these cases”.

The CM also accused Ravi of making false remarks about criminal cases being probed by the state police and criticised him for denying child marriages ever happened at the Chidambaram Nataraja Temple. Stalin claimed Ravi’s statements would have invited legal action if they were from an individual not holding his high constitutional position.

Stalin alleged Ravi was acting as the “agent of the Union government” and had violated his oath to safeguard the Constitution. He accused the Governor of acting as an “elected opponent rather than a neutral representative”. Stating that the Governor’s public expression of “political and religious views” was “highly inappropriate for someone in his position”, Stalin said such actions were causing “distress and attempting to incite disrespect” towards the government.

The CM condemned Ravi for his “insubordination and violation of Section 163(1) of the Constitution by excluding key portions while delivering an edited speech in the Assembly” in early January. The CM said the Governor excluded from his speech terms such as social justice, self-respect, and the Dravidian model of governance. This, he said, illustrated his political intention and lack of belief in these ideals.

The CM emphasised that the Governor’s constant public expression of “divisive religious views” was unsuitable and had the potential to create problems for the state administration, particularly in a diverse state such as Tamil Nadu. The CM also emphasised the government’s commitment to religious harmony and gender equality policies and expressed concern about Ravi’s “lack of faith” in these principles.

The CM said Ravi had “never won any election in Tamil Nadu and seems to have forgotten that he is not a leader of the people, but an appointed official”. Alleging that the Governor’s actions had undermined the idea of federalism, Stalin asserted that Dravidian politics was not regressive. He cited the commitment of Dravidian politics to “progress and social justice” and said its impact was the reason why the state scores higher than the national average on development parameters.