From: narayana@psuvax1.cs.psu.edu (Kuram T Narayana)
Subject: Re: Should Indian states need more autonomy?
Organization: Penn State Computer Science
Distribution: na
Date: Sat, 5 Sep 1992 14:05:39 GMT

In article <1992Sep5.023700.15538@cbnews.cb.att.com> rnk@cbnews.cb.att.com (ram.n.kumar) writes:
>In article <Bu2L5q.Fp3@cs.psu.edu> narayana@psuvax1.cs.psu.edu (Kuram T Narayana) writes:
>>
>>Where such dismissal occurred,
>>it occurred because the party in power at the state lost majority
>^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>(as in the case of NT Rama Rao govt),
>^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
>This is totally untrue. You have bought the Congress propaganda at its
>face value. Either that, or you are not simply aware of the facts.
>There is absolutely no truth to your claim.
>The fact is when NTR government was dismissed in 83-84, he had an
>absolute majority. He actually paraded all the state MLAs before
>the president and demanded an explanation. The president said that
>there was no provision in the Indian constitution, that would allow
>him to take a head count in Rashtrapthi Bhavan lawn on such matters.
>Eventually NTR was reinstated and he proved his majority on the
>assembly floor.  The real problem is, Indian electortate have a rather
>short memory or too forgiving.
>
You are wrong. Nadendla Bhaskara Rao has paraded his supported before the
governor and by the head count made that day and the signatures supplied
to the governor at that time, the NTR govt lost majority. NTR was
legitimately and constitutionally thrown out. His TDP party split into two.
NTR becoming the chief minister of AP was based on his being the 
leader of a majority party. That party having lost majority, he should
be dismissed. Whether he mustered support from other groups subsequent
to his dismissal to claim his majority is a different issue. That is
the reason why he was installed back. He got that majority by terrorising
people with his TDP thugs. So get your facts rights. No body here 
buys the congress propaganda or any body else's. We go by what is
stipulated in the constitution and what should procedurally take
place.

>
>In 60s/70s democratically elected punjab governments were dismissed
>three times (?) each time  to make sure that Cong9I) led alliance
>ruled the state. Each such dismissal was slap on the face of the
>democracy.
>
>Even if we agree that center can dismiss state governments that
>lost majority, it would still be questionable, if the ruling party
>at the center engineered such a shift in majority, by blatant
>horse trading etc. Unfortunately the truth when the Gandhi dynasty
>ruled India, a lot of that happened; India always was and still is
>-to a large extent- a pseudo democracy, just because of such
>engineered defections.
>

Dismissal of state govt that serve the interests of terrorists
and destabilize the nation is a legitimate cause, even if the 
govt were elected. None of the govt elected make the destabilization
as the electoral platform, and come to power on the basis of that.
It is a simple fact, that a nation state cannot permit destabilizing
forces, where the constitution itself is threatened. It is
the chosen responsibility of the govt the protect the constitution,
and the central govt was elected to preserve the constitution.

>>or the
>>state govt were playing hand-in-glove with the terrorist organizations
>^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>(more specifically the fascist Karunanidhi govt and
>>his terrorist cousins LTTE)
>^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>All this is speculation. Nothing has been proven. Do not base your
>arguments on such specualtion. Did Rajiv accept Bofors
>kickbacks? There are numberous allegations and a lot of circumstantial
>evidence and cover-ups (Solanki, and just recently the Delhi High
>court order).
>

There is a substantial evidence that the fascist Karunanidhi regime 
did provide supply routes to the terrorists and training camps.
One of his cabinet secretaries has already implicated this fellow.
So don't buy the SCT propaganda disinformation on the true
colors of these fascists.

Rajiv's bofors issue is a curruption issue and does not deal
with the federal constitution. You should try to address
issues that deal with the provisions of the constitutional
framework, whether actions of teh state govts whoever they
are headed by contravene the provisions of that constitution.
More specifically, defections when engineered are outside
the pale of constitutional judgement. Whether causing
defections is correct or not is an issue aside.

>If you do NOT have the decency to accuse publicly that  Rajiv did
>take Bofors kick-backs, you have no business/moral right to be accusing
>Karunanidhi or anyone else for that matter on the basis of
>unproven allegations and charges.
>
>This actually applies to all of us, not just you. Whatever way you
>treat Rajiv is how you should treat every other Indian citizen.
>If want to give Rajiv the benefit of  doubt, do the same for
>everyone else (regardless of your feelings/attitudes towards
>that person).
>
May I advise you to think twice before you write! There was an
overwhelming reporting of the fascist Karunanidhi's govts
dealings in in the newspapers at the time the IPKF was in
Sri Lanka.

>
>Finally, both Rajiv and Indira Gandhi played with fire and got burned.
>Rajiv supported LTTE when it suited him; Indira supported Bhindranwale
>when it suited her.
>Their political gambles did not pay off.  Why just blame Karunanidhi?
>
>

whether Mrs. Gandhi supported Bhindrenwale is not the issue, for
Mrs. Gandhi has not acted against the constitution. That things
politically misfired is a political issue. Mrs. Gandhi did not
act in contravention of the constitution in respect of the
center and states  vis a vis the preevration of the union.
Whether she acted unconstitutionaly in other matters is
being addressed in this discussion.

Newsgroups: soc.culture.indian