The vultures of Manipur

I have always considered ‘honour among thieves’ to be a vastly overrated concept. I am grateful to the legislators of Manipur, as also to their sponsors in Delhi, to prove that my instincts were correct.

‘Theft’ is an ugly word. But then neither the Samata Party nor the Bharatiya Janata Party is going to win a beauty contest. To tell the truth, I doubt that they could win even an electoral contest at the rate they are going. They certainly did not do so in the last Assembly elections held last year. Which is why all talk of honour, broken promises, and democracy is so much piffle when either party speaks about this unfortunate state.

The data maintained by the Election Commission give the game away. In the Assembly elections held in February 2000, both the Bharatiya Janata Party and the Samata Party performed miserably. The Bharatiya Janata Party won a grand aggregate of six seats in a House with a strength of 60. The Samata Party fared even worse, winning just the Khetrigao constituency. Under these circumstances, it is pure jackassery for either Radhabinod Koijam or R. K. Dorendro Singh to claim any legitimacy.

It may interest you to know that Koijam was not the man elected on a Samata Party ticket. (That honour goes to Basant Kumar Wangkhem.) No, the recently booted chief minister entered the Assembly as a Congressman as did 10 others. I would love to know how the solitary Samata Party legislator suddenly became 12! Or, come to that, how the Bharatiya Janata Party’s numbers have increased from six to 26!

No, I am wrong — I do not want to know. The answer, I am sure, would succeed in further fraying my faith in democracy as practised in Manipur. (I suppose we should all be happy to know that Dorendro Singh was, in fact, elected on a BJP ticket.)

Both the Samata Party and the Bharatiya Janata Party should be ashamed of themselves for their disgraceful behaviour. At the very least they owe an apology to the voters. The electorate had wanted the Congress (I), the Manipur State Congress Party, or whomever to represent it in the Assembly. Encouraging defections by the cartload is nothing to be proud about.

What is truly sad is that the party leaders in Delhi seem so unconcerned about these brute facts. I can imagine the howls of outrage had the tables been reversed, and the Congress (I) built up an army of defectors. I realise, of course, that the Samata Party was itching for an opportunity to throw its weight around but I wish its leaders had chosen a happier occasion. And let me make it clear that the Bharatiya Janata Party too is in no position to claim any moral high ground in Manipur!

I am probably whistling at the wind, but is there anyone, in either party, who has heard of a certain Hafiz Mohammed Ibrahim? It is a story that goes back to 1937. Ibrahim had been elected on a Muslim League ticket, but then decided that the Congress side of the fence was greener.

The Congress High Command of the day had no objection to Ibrahim joining their ranks. The leadership did, however, impose one condition: that he resign from the legislature and then stand for election again. Ibrahim agreed and the Congress then sponsored him. He lost, yet chose to remain in the Congress.

Let us give credit to all the actors in this episode. The Congress leadership was correct in insisting that Ibrahim should not treat the confidence reposed by the voters as a blank cheque. Ibrahim deserved a pat for agreeing to the pre-condition. Can you imagine any of those defectors in present-day Manipur agreeing to undergo the test of a by-election? Or, and this is even more important, the BJP or Samata Party leadership being equally demanding when political morality was concerned?

Neither party, I am sure, remembers this 64-year old episode. Nor, perhaps, would they want to hear that a Congress leadership — even one from that golden era — set an example that shames the leaders of today. That being the case, may I remind them of a name they are definitely familiar with and by whom they swear?

I refer to Loknayak Jayaprakash Narayan. In 1967, the dawn of the ‘Aya Ram, Gaya Ram’ period, the veteran leader came up with an immensely practical suggestion. He was too worldly-wise to suggest that defections could be banned per se. Instead, he suggested that a defector should not hold any office for the life of the legislature to which he was elected. If, however, the lure of ministerial office proved too strong he was free to resign and then offer himself for election to the voters.

Do you see the beauty of the scheme? It does away immediately with all the arithmetical mumbo-jumbo of the Anti-Defection Act.. Of course, that same simplicity probably doomed it from the beginning. In 34 years, no party has taken the Loknayak’s suggestion seriously, not even those organisations which claim him as their Guru.

Sadly, the cancer of defection is not the only disease eating away at Manipur. The state also demonstrates the utter inability of our leaders to stand together in the national interest. My first column this year — this millennium! — was on the way that the Congress (I) leadership had refused to go along with the BJP on the question of President’s rule in Manipur. Had Sonia Gandhi agreed — which was her first instinct — the current mess could have been avoided.

As noted earlier, speaking of morality is probably a waste of breath. So here is an observation for all the ‘practical’ men in politics: short-cuts don’t pay, whether defections or last-minute alliances. The BJP opted for a shotgun wedding with the Janata Dal in Karnataka in 1999. Learning nothing from the experience, it tried again with the Assam Gana Parishad two years later. And need I mention the Congress (I)’s wooing of Mamata Banerjee?

But let us get back to Manipur. The Assembly, for all practical purposes, has ceased to exist. Let there be fresh polls, without wasting time debating which vulture deserves a juicier share of the remains.

Earlier Columns