The tale of two women who have taken on Gujarat’s "Iron Man"

[email protected] (The Hindu)
December 10, 2012

Jagruti

Ahmedabad, December 10: It is 8.30 a.m. on Saturday in the middle class area of Chandra Nagar. Jagruti Pandya, widow of former Gujarat Home Minister Haren Pandya, who was murdered in 2003, is doing a walkabout. She is the Gujarat Parivartan Party (GPP) candidate from the posh Ellisbridge constituency, which her late husband represented, and her decision to use this election to focus on the fact that all those charged with her husband’s brutal killing were let off last year, has created a ripple of interest. Her workers are a mix of friends and former BJP workers who have shifted allegiance to the GPP, led by the former Chief Minister Keshubhai Patel, who too walked out of the BJP.

In Maninagar — Chief Minister Narendra Modi’s constituency — his challenger, the Congress candidate Shweta Bhatt, the wife of IPS officer Sanjeev Bhatt, who has allegedly been victimised for making revelations about the role of Mr. Modi and his administration in the anti-Muslim pogrom in 2002, draws attention to injustice in the State: “If I win, it will be a victory for Gujarat; if I lose, Gujarat will lose,” she says with a theatrical turn of phrase.

As both women campaign — Ms. Bhatt in an SUV, Ms. Pandya on foot — door-to-door, people come out on to their balconies, some onto the streets. For these self-declared homemakers who have thus far had nothing to do with politics — even Ms. Pandya stresses she has never accompanied her late husband on the election trail — both answer questions with ease, their storylines smooth. They are also picture perfect — Ms. Pandya, serene, scrubbed face, subdued in a grey silk sari with the yellow GPP scarf draped over her shoulders; Ms. Bhatt effervescent in a bright red maheshwari sari, a big bindi on her forehead.

Neither Ms. Pandya, nor Ms. Bhatt is likely to win, say locals. But in an election in which the communal carnage of 2002 is not an issue, with the Congress tiptoeing around it lest it awaken old ghosts, the fact that these women have left the sanctuary of their homes to enter politics is the only reminder of the terrible happenings of a decade ago, and of Mr. Modi’s role in them.

The two women could not differ more in their ideological persuasions — Ms. Pandya considers the BJP-RSS combine as her family, while Ms. Bhatt says she accepted the Congress ticket as the party’s ideology matched her own. They refuse to say very much about the other, only stressing that the other is doing what she thinks is right. “All these years, I sought justice from the legal system. I failed,” Ms. Pandya stresses that “the BJP was Haren’s family, but he was let down. So I am contesting this election to seek justice in the court of the people.”

As she walks through the compounds of local cooperative housing societies, microphone in hand, she looks up at the balconies, introduces herself as Haren Pandya’s widow, reminds them of his work in the area and asks for their votes as shradhanjali [homage].

Mr. Pandya’s killing was always regarded as a political murder. While the prosecution’s case was that he had been killed by assailants from Hyderabad to avenge the anti-Muslim riots of 2002, it is well-known that he was the Minister who had secretly deposed before the Citizen’s Tribunal on the riots, making revelations that were not yet in the public domain. At a cabinet meeting, he had reportedly advocated against bringing bodies of the victims of the Godhra carnage to Ahmedabad, as he thought that would trigger off a violent response. But he was apparently shouted down at the meeting. Whatever the reason, Mr. Modi sacked him in July 2002, and ensured that he did not get the ticket from his Ellisbridge constituency in the Assembly elections later that year. After being forced out of electoral politics, Mr. Pandya was trying to figure out his next move when he was killed in Ahmedabad’s Law Gardens. His body was found in his car.

In Ms. Bhatt’s case, her husband is known for his role in filing an affidavit in the Supreme Court against Mr. Modi for his alleged role in the 2002 Gujarat riots. She says she is fighting to protest against the harassment of her husband and family, and to make it possible once again for the people of Gujarat to speak their minds: “There is no freedom of speech in Gujarat, I am fighting for that,” she says, adding that she is also focusing on the lack of development in Mr. Modi’s constituency.

In Congress circles, there has been much debate about fielding Ms. Bhatt, as it might be seen as the party “owning” Mr. Bhatt and undermining his credibility and his fight against Mr. Modi. But others felt that this was the closest the party could risk in making a statement about Mr. Modi’s alleged role in the 2002 riots.

The common thread that binds the battles being waged by these two women, whose world views differ so greatly, is that they have both dared to put the spotlight on a man most people in Gujarat regard as invincible and all-powerful. No small achievement, regardless of whether they win or lose their elections.


Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
April 25,2024

modirahul.jpg

The Election Commission of India on Thursday announced that it had taken cognisance of violations to the Model Code of Conduct by both Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Congress leader Rahul Gandhi.

While Modi has indulged in a diatribe against Muslims, without naming them, using terms like 'infiltrators' and 'those with more children', Rahul has been accused of making a false claim about 'rise in poverty'.

Both the BJP and INC have raised allegations of causing hatred and divisions based on caste, religion, language, and community, ANI reported.

While the EC had initially refused to comment on Modi's speeches, sources had told PTI that the commission was 'looking into' the remarks made by the BJP leader.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
April 26,2024

Palakkad: Three voters from Palakkad, Malappuram and Alappuzha, and a polling agent in Kozhikode died in seperate incidents in Kerala on Friday.

A man collapsed and died after casting his vote at Vani Vilasini in Chunangad, Ottapalam here on Friday. The deceased Chandran (68) hailed from Modernkattil  in Chunangad. Though rushed to the Ottapalam taluk hopsital, he was declared dead on arrival. Palakkad had recorded a high temperature of 40 degree Celsius on Thursday.

A Madrassa teacher, who came home after voting, collapsed and died. The deceased Alikkannakkal Tharakkal Siddhique (63) was the first voter at the polling station in Vallikkanjiram School at Niramaruthur Grama Panchayat in Tirur.

Kakkazham Veiliparambu Somarajan (82), who voted and returned home from the Kakkazham SN VT High School in Alappuzha also collapsed and died. He was a voter from booth 138.

In another instance, a polling agent died after collapsing at a booth in Kuttichira, Kozhikode on Friday. Maliyekkal Anees (66), a retired KSEB engineer from Haluwa Bazaar, was LDF's polling agent at the 16th booth in Kuttichira Government Vocational Higher Secondary School. He collapsed while doing his duty in the polling booth by 8.30 am. Though rushed to the Government General Hospital, he died by 9.15am. He is survived by wife Adakkani Veettil Zereena, childrens  Fayis Ahammed, Fadhil Ahammed, Akhil Ahammed and Bilal Ahammed.

A man also died in bike accident en route to polling booth in Malappuram on Friday. The deceased is Saidu Haji (75) of Neduvan. The bike rammed a lorry near BM School in Parappanangadi.

Polling began at 7am in all 20 Lok Sabha constituencies in Kerala on Friday. 

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
April 25,2024

EVM.jpg

Electronics Corporation of India Ltd and Bharat Electronics Ltd have refused to disclose the names and contact details of the manufacturers and suppliers of various components of EVMs and VVPATs under the RTI Act citing "commercial confidence", according to RTI responses from the PSUs to an activist.

Activist Venkatesh Nayak had filed two identical Right To Information applications with the ECIL and BEL, seeking the details of the manufacturers and suppliers of various components used in the assembling of the electronic voting machines (EVMs) and voter-verifiable paper audit trail (VVPATs).

The VVPAT is an independent vote verification system which enables electors to see whether their votes have been cast correctly.

The ECIL and the BEL, public sector undertakings under the Ministry of Defence, manufacture EVMs and VVPATs for the Election Commission.

Nayak also sought a copy of the purchase orders for the components from both PSUs.

"Information sought is in commercial confidence. Hence details cannot be provided under Section 8(1)(d) of the RTI Act," BEL said in its response.

A similar response was sent by ECIL which said the details requested are related to a product which is being manufactured by ECIL, and third party in nature.

"Disclosing of details will affect the Competitive position of ECIL. Hence, Exemption is claimed under section 8(1) (d) of RTI ACT, 2005," it said.

In response to the purchase order copies, ECIL's central public information officer said the information is "voluminous" which would disproportionately divert the resources of the Public Authority.

"Further, the information will give away the design details of EVM components. The same may pose a danger to the machines produced. Hence, the exemption is claimed U/s 7(9) and under section 8(1)(d) of RTI Act, 2005," ECIL said.

Section 8(1)(d) of the RTI Act exempts from disclosure the information, including commercial confidence, trade secrets or intellectual property, the disclosure of which would harm the competitive position of a third party, unless the competent authority is satisfied that larger public interest warrants the disclosure of such information.

Section 7(9) of the Act says the information shall ordinarily be provided in the form in which it is sought unless it would disproportionately divert the resources of the public authority or would be detrimental to the safety or preservation of the record in question.

"I don't know whose interests they are trying to protect against the right to know of close to a billion-strong electorate. ECIL said that disclosure of the purchase orders will reveal the design details of the components and this may pose a danger to the machines produced. ECIL did not upload even a signed copy of its reply on the RTI Online Portal," Nayak said.

He said it is reasonable to infer that the two companies are not manufacturing every single item of the EVM-VVPAT combo or else the two companies would have replied that they are manufacturing all these components internally without any outsourcing being involved.

"But the electorate is expected to take everything about the voting machines based on what the ECI is claiming in its manuals and FAQs," Nayak said.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.