EDITORIAL : THE HINDU, INDIA

 

Cash, checks, and elections

The 2011 Assembly election in Tamil Nadu stands out for several reasons, some of them heartening, others deeply disturbing. The record turnout of 77.8 per cent, which beats the 76.57 per cent of the landmark 1967 election when the Congress was voted out for the first time, came on the back of commendable efforts by the Election Commission of India to ensure comprehensive coverage of voters in the photo electoral rolls. With the names of the dead and the absent punctiliously deleted, the rolls were more accurate this time. Quick, efficient polling through the Electronic Voting Machines shortened the queues at the polling stations. But the 2011 election will also be remembered for the widespread, systematic distribution of cash as inducement to voters, especially by the ruling Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam and allies such as the Congress. Cash-for-votes is not a new phenomenon, but it acquired an extraordinary dimension after the Thirumangalam by-election in Tamil Nadu in January 2009, when the ruling party doled out cash to almost every eligible voter in the constituency. This was a new trend, and was captured brilliantly in a United States Embassy cable sent on May 13, 2009, which was accessed by The Hindu through WikiLeaks (http://www.thehindu.com/news/the-india-cables/article1541385.ece). To the extent available resources allowed, the Thirumangalam formula was replicated by the DMK at the State level for the Lok Sabha election in May 2009. But in 2011, the ruling party found a clear-sighted, resolute, and pro-active Chief Electoral Officer, Praveen Kumar, standing in its way. Acting on the instructions of the ECI in letter and spirit, Mr. Kumar and his dedicated team managed to curb the distribution of money and other inducements, by effecting seizures of about Rs.33.78 crore in cash and Rs.12.59 crore worth of materials.

Corruption, the rise in the prices of essential commodities, and freebies dominated the campaign, which was restricted to about two weeks thanks to the tight schedule drawn up by the ECI to ensure effective monitoring of the election process. The All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam led by former Chief Minister Jayalalithaa projected the 2G scam as a defining issue and improved upon several freebie promises made in the DMK's manifesto. For the DMK, octogenarian Chief Minister M. Karunanidhi dwelt on the welfare measures of his government, promising to do more if given a sixth term in office. Fortunately, despite the keen contest and the bitter political rivalry, the State witnessed no major incidents of violence during the campaign or the election. Until May 13, when the results will be out, Tamil Nadu is set for a period of suspenseful peace and quiet.

The killing of a moderate

As a religious leader, Maulana Showkat Ahmed Shah was a promoter of the purist Wahabi school of Islam in Kashmir over its indigenous liberal Sufism. As a political voice, he stood with the separatists. Within the limits of these categories, the cleric, who headed the religious group Jamiat Ahle Hadees, was a known moderate who was at pains to dissociate the Wahabism he preached from its violent and regressive avatar in Pakistan and Afghanistan. Although not part of the Hurriyat Conference, he was associated with the less hardline of the two factions and was vocal against violence and militancy. He was allied with the secular-minded Yasin Malik of the Jammu and Kashmir Liberation Front. Last spring, he opposed the stone-pelters, issuing a fatwa against the protest as un-Islamic. Earlier this year, the cleric defied a taboo in Kashmir by demanding a new inquiry into the killings of three separatist leaders — Mirwaiz Farooq, Abdul Gani Lone, and Qazi Nissar. This is possibly why Abdul Ghani Bhat, former chairman of the Hurriyat Conference, dared to declare that these leaders were killed by “our own people,” a cry later picked up by the Lone brothers, Sajjad and Bilal, about the killing of their father. Mr. Shah was also the only separatist leader to meet the government-appointed team of interlocutors. Tragically, but not surprisingly, the man who escaped attempts on his life in 2006 and 2008, finally fell victim to Kashmir's relentless violence. This time, the assassins left nothing to chance; they killed him with an improvised explosive planted on a bicycle as he entered a mosque in Srinagar to deliver the Friday sermon on April 8.

The killing has served to highlight the uncertainty in the Valley. The hope is that the tentative moves to break the 26/11 ice on the India-Pakistan engagement will lead to forward movement in Kashmir. The interlocutors are set to hold a round-table conference with all sections of Kashmiri opinion later this month, and have invited the separatists to participate. If the moderate Hurriyat faction led by Mirwaiz Omer Farooq was at all reconsidering its refusal to engage in the dialogue, the killing of Mr. Shah is likely to act as a deterrent. An unusually strong statement from the Pakistan government has condemned Mr. Shah's killing as “abominable,” and stressed that “violence against innocent persons cannot be justified on any grounds.” But it does not bode well that Hafiz Saeed, head of the Jamat-ud-dawa, who vows to take Kashmir by force, used the killing to resurface in Islamabad, reiterating his own agenda, and criticising last month's cricket diplomacy. All in all, complacency is the last thing Kashmir needs.