M A I N   N E W S

DMK accuses Jaya, Chief Secy of violating norms
Arup Chanda
Tribune News Service

Chennai, October 30
The Tamil Nadu Chief Minister, Ms J. Jayalalithaa, today received another setback as the Opposition charged her and the state Chief Secretary with breach of Constitutional norms and the oath of secrecy by taping her telephonic conversation with the Union Home Minister, Mr Shivraj Patil.

The Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) President, Mr M. Karunanidhi accused Ms Jayalalithaa and the Chief Secretary Ms Lakshmi Pranesh, of violating official secrecy by filing a transcript of the conversation as part of Ms Pranesh’s affidavit in the Supreme Court.

In a strongly worded statement Tamil, DMK supremo asked, "Can a conversation between a Union Minister with a state Chief Minister be recorded? And can the Chief Secretary disclose these details in the Supreme Court?"

He even lashed out at the Governor, Mr Rammohan Rao, and Ms Pranesh for allegedly acting like politicians and said it was up to the Court, people who value morality and legal experts to decide on questions that arise out of this issue.

Mr Karunanidhi also refuted the charge that he had got a "pliant Governor" in the present Andhra Pradesh Governor Mr Surjit Singh Barnala, who has been shifted to Tamil Nadu, with a view to getting the AIADMK government dismissed under Article 356 of the Constitution. "The DMK had no intention of demanding the regime’s dismissal," he said.

Rebutting the DMK chief’s claims Ms Jayalalithaa, in a statement, said there was no breach of any oath of secrecy, because it was a matter already pending before the Supreme Court concerning the proposal to transfer the Governor and because the conversation disclosed a specific cause of action for possible court intervention.

She said it was normal for the Chief Minister to brief the Chief Secretary on important issues like Centre-State relations so that action on government’s behalf could be initiated and explained how the Chief Secretary was privy to her conversation with Mr Patil.

She, however, did not deny the charge that the conversation was taped.

She said, "The whole issue relating to the transfer of the Governor had been in the public domain for quite a few months, and it was no state secret. Twelve AIADMK MPs had already approached the Supreme Court in a pending case relating to the appointment, transfer and removal of Governors, and the Tamil Nadu Government itself filed a suit after it became apparent that the Centre would kowtow to the dictates of Mr Karunanidhi."

The Chief Minister said the Supreme Court, which did not pass any interim orders on October 24, had said it could be approached again if there was a specific cause of action and added that the conversation with Mr Patil disclosed such a cause of action.

Mr Karunanidhi, on the other hand, argued that how the Chief Secretary, as an officer of the Union services, could interfere in the powers of the President in the matter of appointing or removing a Governor.

He alleged, "Filing a case of this nature is an interference in the rights of the President."

Mr Karunanidhi said the Chief Secretary had stated in her affidavit in an application on October 24 that the DMK wanted a Governor who would toe its line and could be pressured into giving an unfavourable report against the state government to cause its disimissal.

In another place in the affidavit, the Chief Secretary had alleged that Mr Karunanidhi did not meet Prime Minister Manmohan Singh in Chennai on October 23 in order to pressurise him to change the Governor, he pointed out and took exception to such overtly political statements in the Chief Secretary’s affidavit.

"What right has a government official got to allege that DMK was pressing for removing the Governor and appointing a pliant one in his place? Can such an official continue in office after acting like a member of a political party?’ he asked.Mr Karunanidhi also lashed out at the outgoing Governor for his lengthy statement justifying the way in which he had discharged his duties.

He strongly criticised Mr Rao for giving a clean chit to the AIADMK government on the law and order front, and claiming that there was no adverse comment on the situation from any quarter, including the Press, except from some political parties.