Quantcast
Channel: JIGME N KAZI
Viewing all articles
Browse latest Browse all 190

Article 0

$
0
0

 

‘ULTIMATELY, PEOPLE POWER WILL TRIUMPH OVER MONEY POWER”

   Issues raised in Jigme N. Kazi’s reply to the Sikkim Pradesh Congress Committee’s show cause notice cannot be confined to the Congress party alone. Kazi’s lengthy reply to charges of “anti-party activities” leveled against him touches on several core issues that concern the State’s political elite and the people at large.    

   “Essentially, the fight is between a few good men or women, who represent the hopes and aspirations of the Sikkimese people, and a bunch of opportunists, sometimes masquerading as politicians or social workers, who are backed by those in power,” says Kazi. He, however, adds, “Ultimately, people power will triumph over money power.”

 

    Bhandari and Khurshid

 

Shri Namkha Gyaltsen

President

Sikkim Pradesh Congress Committee

Gangtok (Sikkim)                                                   Dated: Sept. 2, 2001

 

Subject: Show Cause Notice

Sir,

   This has reference to your letter No. SPCC/012/01, dated August 19, 2001, regarding a show cause not9ice (copy enclosed – Annexure –1) issued to me by the Sikkim Pradesh Congress Committee for my alleged anti-party activities. In this connection my reaction to the allegations is as follows:

  1. Allegation 1: Repeated refusal to attend the SPCC meetings:

(a)   As per records maintained by the SPCC I have attended most the party meetings held in Sikkim since I joined the party in November 2000. To verify this fact the register for resolutions/minutes of the SPCC may be examined. In the absence of Shri Somnath Poudyal, General Secretary (Organisation and Administration), in the past several months it is I who have been calling many of the party meetings either verbally or through writing. The party President, The General Secretary and other PCC Executive Committee members are well aware of this fact. Therefore, the allegation that I repeatedly refused to attend party meetings is false, baseless and politically-motivated.

(b)   I did not attend the party meetings held in Gangtok on July 27, 2001 and August 19, 2001. I have genuine reasons for not being able to attend these two meetings:

(i)     July 27 meeting: I had informed the party President that I would not be able to attend the meeting as I was engaged in observing an important puja at home on this day. The pujas were performed by five lamas of the Chorten Monastery of Gangtok. They, along with other members of my family, relatives and workers at my construction site, may be contacted to verify this fact.

(ii)              August 19 meeting: On August 18 night, the party President rang me up and asked me to attend a party meeting in Gangtok on August 19 (Sunday). I told him that I could not attend the meeting as I had already agreed to attend a public meeting of the Sikkim Sangram Parishad at Sangram Bhawan, Gangtok (SSP letter inviting me to attend the meeting enclosed – Annexure II). Since it was a Sunday and a holiday at my Press I could not send my reporters to cover the meeting. I attended the SSP meeting and sat on the press gallery among other journalists. Local journalists, SSP leaders and workers may be contacted to verify this fact. The SSP meeting began at 11 a.m. and lasted till 3 p.m. The SPCC meeting was also called at the same time.

        Allegation 2: Attendance at meetings of other political parties:

 

(i)     I attended two public meetings of the SSP at the Sangrarm Bhawan, Gangtok on May 24, 2001, the 17th birth anniversary of the party, (SSP letter inviting me to the meeting enclosed – Annexure-III) and August 19, 2001. Invitation letter to me from the SSP to attend these two meetings as a journalist are enclosed. During the two meetings I sat on the press gallery along with other journalists. SSP workers/leaders and journalists may be contacted to verify this fact.

 

       (ii) I do not remember attend any other political party meetings of either the SSP or   

             any other parties as a journalist or as a Congressman after I joined the Congress

             party in November 2000. The charges leveled against me are not specific. They

             are false, baseless and politically-motivated.

       Allegation 3: Misuse of office of the General Secretary of the party by way ofpublication of newsitems deliberately distorted to lower the prestige of the Congressparty and party members:

(i)     The charges are not specific. I edit Sikkim Observer, an English weekly published from Gangtok. The AICC President, along with other party functionaries from Delhi, are on the mailing list of the paper. The Observer has carried a number of newsitems, articles etc. on the Congress party in the past ten months. So far I have not received any complaint from any Congress worker or leader. On the contrary, many people in the State have given due credit to me and the paper for the growing popularity of the party in the State.

(ii) The show cause may be referring to a newsitem in the Observer dated August 11-17, 2001 captioned: “Stalling SSP-Cong merger aiding ‘vested interests” (copy of newsitem enclosed – Annexure – IV). If the party wishes to raise any objection to the said newsitem it should take up the matter with the Editor/Publisher/Printer of the Observer and not with the SPCC General Secretary. Though the Editor/Publisher/Printer of the Observer may also be the SPCC General Secretary it is not correct to penalize the General Secretary on the basis on the newsitem. The action taken against me is an indirect method to impose indirect press censorship and suppress freedom of the Press, an issue the Indian National Congress has always been championing.

   If the Observer report is baseless appropriate action may be initiated against the paper. However, if the report is based on facts and feelings of the people appropriate action should be initiated against the concerned persons who are indulging in anti-party activities and damaging the image of the Congress in the eyes of the people.

I believe the actual reason why the SPCC, during its meeting held in Gangtok on August 19, 2001, decided to suspend me from the party for alleged anti-party activities is because I was perceived as a stumbling block for a few Congress leaders who are bent on placing their personal interests above the interest of the party and the people at large.

   Having replied to the show cause notice it is my bounded duty to place before the party leadership the developments within the Congress party in the past few months and the present political situation in the State in the right perspective.

   Independent observers, including Congress workers, and the people, by and large, are convinced that casteist and communal forces, aided by rampant corruption in the administration, have not only destroyed the age-old peace, harmony and unity of the Sikkimese people, but have also hindered real economic development in the State. If prompt and appropriate action is not taken at the right time by the concerned authorities, which include the Congress party, there is every possibility of this sensitive and strategicallylocated border State heading towards an unchartered destination, which is likely to endanger national unity and integrity.

   I believe that the need of the hour is for all secular and democratic forces to put aside their personal interests and differences and work for the larger and long-term interests of the State and the country as a whole. Despite being the major player in the State’s integration into the mainstream the Indian National Congress has never won a single Assembly elections in Sikkim ever since it became the 22nd State of the Union in April 1975.  The Congress party managed to form the government in Sikkim through the backdoor on two occasions – in 1981 and 1994.  Had the party formed an alliance with the Opposition Sikkim Sangram Parishad in the October 1999 Assembly elections it would have faired well. Unfortunately, the party did not even win a single seat in the 32-member House. The Congress party got only 4% of the votes polled while the SSP took 44% of the votes and won seven seats. This ought to be a matter of concern for all Congress leaders and workers.

   The fact that the SSP President, Shri Nar Bahadur Bhandari, wants to merge his party (SSP) with the Congress has been brought to the knowledge of the AICC and the PCC. With the approval of the PCC and with the prior knowledge and consent of the AICC talks were initiated on SSP’s merger with the Congress since January 2001. The PCC President, Shri Namkha Gyaltsen, had written a letter to the AICC President, Shrimati Sonia Gandhi, in January 2001 on this matter (letter enclosed – Annexure-V). While the talks have progressed on the said issue it came to an abrupt end when the PCC Executive Committee at its meeting held in Gangtok on Jly 27, 2001 decided that the merger of the SSP with the Congress be suspended temporarily. The press release of the party meeting on July 27 is enclosed (Annexure – VI).

Circumstances in which the process of the proposed merger of the Sikkim Sangram Parishad (SSP) with the Indian National Congress, which began in December-January this year, and which came to an abrupt and unexpected end, albeit temporarily, on July 27, have formed me to set the records straight and also to place certain vital issues and events on record.

   I do this with utmost sincerity and honesty not only for the interest of the Congress party but also in the larger interest of the State and the country as a whole. I am persuaded and am convinced that the Congress leadership and party workers, within and outside the State, have a right to know how, why and who takes decisions on their behalf on various matters that concern them and the people at large.

   It was under the direction and guidance of the PCC President, Shri Namkha Gylatsen, and with due permission from the AICC and PCC that Shri Balchand Sarda, PCC Treasurer, former MLA and one of the most respected and seniormost Congressmen in Sikkim, and I, PCC General Secretary, became official mediators of the party for talks with the SSP President, Shri Nar Bahadur Bhandari, on the merger issue. Out main role has been to arrange meetings between the leaders of the two parties for discussion on the said issue.

   Starting from January 2001 we pursued the matter most sincerely giving it the priority that such matter deserves. After holding several meetings with Shri Bhandari – in at least three of these meetings the PCC President was present – we finally received a written document from Shri Bhandari where he put forward several conditions for the proposed merger.

   Out last and perhaps the most important meeting with Shri Bhandari was held in Gangtok on June 20. The PCC President was also present during this meeting. The outcome of this meeting was very fruitful and all of us decided to brief Shri Mani Shankar Aiyar on the merger issue with a view to taking the matter to its logical conclusion during the AICC’s political training camp in Guwahati on July 13-14.

Realising that informal talks on the merger issue had reached a final stage just before our Guwahati meet it was now the right time to take up the matter officially with the PCC as well as the AICC while observing the due process on such matters.

   However, despite these developments we were surprised to note that the matter was not presented to Shri Aiyar in the right perspective. Instead, the party leadership conveyed the impression that it wanted to contest the ensuing Panchayat polls on its own and asked for Shri Aiyar’s views on the matter and funds from the AICC to contest the polls.

   Shri Aiyar clearly told us that before forming any kind of strategy on the panchayat polls the party should first settle whether there is going to be an outright merger with the SSP or just an alliance. Only after this matter is settled the party should formulate its strategy on the ensuing panchayat polls. Shri Aiyar indicated that some of the conditions placed before the party by the SSP President may not be acceptable but he clearly and very categorically stated that matters regarding the merger and panchayat polls should be decided before August 31.

   Despite Shri Aiyar’s clear instruction on the two issues an emergent meeting of the PCC Executive Committee was fixed for July 27. The decision to hold this meeting took place in Guwahati itself. During the July 27 meeting the PCC Executive Committee decided to temporarily close the chapter on the merger issue. The reason given for this abrupt move was that the conditions placed by Shri Bhandari were too “rigid” and, therefore, not acceptable to the party.

   After the Guwahati meet and just before the July 27 PCC meeting PCC President’s comments on the merger issue was carried in a local English weekly: “As of now the merger between the Congress (I) and the Sikkim Sangram Parishad is temporarily suspended” (Weekend Review July 20-26, 2001). Judging by Shri Gyaltsen’s remarks and the development that followed it appears that the decision to put an abrupt end to the proposed SSP-Cong merger was taken even before the PCC meeting on July 27. Is this just and democratic? (copy of newsitem enclosed – Annexure – VII).

In view of the above background I would like to place on record the following points:

1.  Shri Bhandari remains an influential figure in State politics. The proposed merger of the SSP with the INC is a big issue not only for the two parties but for the State as a whole. A few leaders at the top alone cannot and must not be allowed to take decisions either in favour or against the merger. It is perfectly OK to confine the talks among a few selected Congressmen at the initial stage. However, once the preliminary discussion are over all levels of the party’s hierarchy must be taken into confidence while deciding on the said matter. The AICC ought to be the deciding factor on such important matters.

  1. The importance of observing the democratic process and involving party workers from the grassroots level on the said issue was emphasized by Shri Aiyar to the PCC President and myself during his visit to the State in June this year. Shri Aiyar very specifically stated that it was not enough for the PCC alone to pass a resolution welcoming Shri Bhandari in to the party. He asked us to call a general body meeting of the party and place the issue before them. This was never done. Shri Aiyar also said a tripartite meeting between the AICC, PCC and SSP should be held in Delhi to sort out contentious issues once the merger process is formally under progress.
  2. When the PCC President raised the subject of the ensuing panchayat polls in Sikkim during our brief meeting with Shri Aiyar in Guwahati on July 13, Shri Aiyar very categorically said the party should first decide on the proposed merger issue before raising the subject regarding panchayat polls. He specifically instructed the party leaders to first sort out whether the party wants a complete merger, an alliance or seat adjustment with the SSP for the panchayat polls before August 31 and then come to Delhi for talks. As far as my knowledge goes this very specific direction was not carried out to its logical conclusion. Why?
  3. The emergent meeting of the PCC Executive Committee was called on July 27 to discuss on the ensuing panchayat polls and “other party matters”. The panchayat polls was the ‘principal agenda’ for the said meeting as per the calling letter (letter enclosed – Annexure – VIII) for the said meeting. No specific mention was made in the letter that the meeting would discuss the merger issue and yet a very important decision was taken on this issue. Why?
  4. A Press release of the party after the July 27 meeting said the conditions put forward by Shri Bhandari for the proposed merger were not acceptable to the AICC as well as the PCC. Apart from Shri Aiyar’s reaction on the conditions the PCC, in my view, has no knowledge about the AICC’s views on the conditions put forward by the SSP President. If the PCC leadership has received the AICC’s views on this it must and should let party workers know about it. Observation of the democratic process demands transparency, openness and accountability at all levels of functioning.
  5. Shri Bhandari did place his conditions in writing before the Congress part. The PCC had earlier demanded that if Shri Bhandari is really keen on joining the Congress and merging his party with it he should spell out his conditions in black and white. The SSP President responded positively to this request. That some of his conditions are unacceptable to some of us is a different matter altogether. But did the SPCC (I) President reciprocate Shri Bhandari’s gesture and place before him our reactions and conditions for the proposed merger? No we did not. Instead, we temporarily closed the chapter without even having the courtesy to inform him of our decision, leave alone placing before him our conditions. We, too, have out terms and conditions on matters regarding party organization, elections, issues etc. for the proposed merger. Were we ever given an opportunity to place our views on this issue on record?
  6. Democratic process and decency demands that the PCC President formally place before the PC, DCC etc. the demands and conditions put forward by the SSP President. Discussing the conditions placed by Shri Bhandari with a few Congressmen informally is not enough. When the PCC authorizes the PCC President to obtain Shri Bhandari’s conditions for the proposed merger in writing it was expected that copies of the conditions made by him be distributed to party leaders and workers to study and apply their mind and react to it before taking a final decision on the issue.

   Unfortunately, this was never done. Although I had a brief glimpse of the conditions on two occasion, I, though the General Secretary of the party, do not have a copy of it. Shri Bhandari is a controversial figure and each of us will surely react favourably, adversely or neutrally on the proposed merger. However, after a thorough discussion and debate a consensus must be arrived at on the issue in the interest of the party. The PCC’s executive body alone cannot have the final stay on the merger issue. The process that took almost 7 months cannot be put to rest, albeit temporarily, in one single meeting of the Executive Committee of the PCC when a positive note had been struck on the issue. Is the decision on the merger issue taken by the Executive Committee on July 27 in favour of the Congress party or the ruling party? Proper explanation must be given on this issue.

  1. The leaders of the Indian National Congress at all levels in the States as well as the Centre are expected to work in the best interest of the party and the country at all times. The manner in which the merger issue has been handles by a section of the PCC leadership recently has created doubts in the minds of the people of the credibility and integrity of the SPCC leadership and the image of the party as a whole in the State. That the above developments have taken place at a time when there are strong allegations and reports that some Congress leaders are hobnobbing with those in power and working against the overall interest of the party are very serious and disturbing developments which calls for a thorough enquiry by the party high command at the earliest.

      It is now almost confirmed that a delegation of the Congress party met the Chief Minister, Shri Pawan Chamling, at his official residence at Mintokgang in the morning of July 18, 2001. While no one can object to Opposition leaders meeting the Chief Minister the fact that such meeting took place at a time when people, including Congress workers, have doubts and are suspicious of the dubious role being placed by certain Congress leaders in the present political situation is highly questionable. Is the Congress high command functioning from Mintokgang (CM’s official residence) or from 24 Akbar Road in New Delhi? While some of us are sincerely and seriously working for the best interest of the party despite being placed under great pressure it is not right, fair and proper if ever there are those among us who are working for casteist, communal and corrupt forces and going against the interest of the party and secular and democratic forces in the State.

   My meeting with the PCC President on August 1 confirmed that at least a dozen Congress members were present at Mintokgang on July 18. The PCC chief has also disclosed to me that they had gone to Mintokgang with his prior knowledge and consent. While the party cannot object to its members meeting the Chief Minister is it advisable to enter the Chief Minister’s residence at this juncture? It is high time that the party leadership at the top intervene and took serious view of the anti-party activities indulged in by rank opportunists and power brokers within the Congress and set the party in the right course before more damage is done to the party.

  1. To enable Congress workers to revive the party from the grassroots there is the need to identify real and genuine Congress workers at all levels and allow them to play a more effective and dominant role in the better functioning of the party in the State. To achieve this objective the AICC should immediately send a competent and independent team to thoroughly probe into the activities of the Congress party and some of its leaders. Only after the team submits a report to the AICC should the party high command take necessary action. People power should be mobilized and money power of vested interests should not be allowed to influence the activities of the party in the State.

10. I strongly believe that there is a conspiracy, aided by outside forces, to ensure that the Congress party does not move ahead but remains a stagnant party. Instead of accepting the challenges and forging ahead we have yielded and submitted ourselves to the evil designs of our adversaries. Congressmen like myself have become a victim in the present circumstances. Apart from being suspended from the post of General Secretary I have also been removed from the post of Co-ordinator, Political Training Department of the AICC (enclosed SPCC press release of 19.8.2001 – Annexure – IX).

   Having seen it all I do not have faith and confidence on the present leadership of the party the State. The party high command ought to take a serious view of the situation and take immediate remedial steps to set things right. I seek speedy justice from the party high command on my own behalf, on behalf of the party workers and the Sikkimese people as a whole.

 

Yours faithfully,

     Sd/-

(Jigme N. Kazi)   

 

Copy to: (i) Shrimati Sonia Gandhi, President, AICC

               (ii) Shri Mani Shanker Aiyar, AICC Secretary Incharge of Sikkim and   

                      North-East                  

                (iii) Shri Oscar Fernandes, General Secretary, AICC

                 

                           


Viewing all articles
Browse latest Browse all 190