Democracy in Danger; We Must Change the Law for Election of the Speaker

Subhas Chandra Pattanayak

Makers of Indian Constitution were individually and collectively proud of their concern for the country and were eager to finalize the Constitution for expediting emergence of Indian Republic. This eagerness made them make such mistakes that now expedites the ruin of the Republic.

That, Indian Republic is in ruins does not need any proof, because we all have seen how the entire winter session of the Parliament collapsed as the Prime Minister of the tainted government did not agree with Opposition demand for constitution of a Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) to investigate into the 2G Spectrum scam.

It was natural on part of Dr. Manmohan Singh not to agree for a JPC.

He has the experience of how injurious could be a JPC to his position.

In 1992, he had tendered his resignation after being held guilty by the JPC constituted to probe into the securities scam that owed its origin to his role as the Finance Minister of India. Many a Congress members of the Parliament had put tremendous pressure on everybody that mattered for removal of the adverse comment of the JPC on Dr. Singh; but the JPC did not buzz. He had to resign and he resigned from the post of the Finance Minister. If Prime Minister Narasingh Rao were not under the spell of Chandraswamy, his bed of tryst with the USA, Singh’s resignation should certainly been accepted and the country could surely been saved from the pernicious grip of the traitors that have transformed our democracy to plutocracy.

So, Manmohan Singh is bound to be afraid of JPC.

And, therefore, his government is not supposed to welcome the proposal for formation of JPC.

But was the consent of the government necessary for formation of the JPC? No. It was not at all necessary.

The Speaker should have constituted a JPC to probe into the spectrum scam and any or all other such financial loot that has occurred during Singh’s regime or even from the day the country has been subjected to globalization. But the Speaker did not appoint a JPC. This resulted in collapse of the entire session.

The year 2010 has progressed into 2011. But India will never progress into democracy again if the provision for election of the Speaker is not changed. As mentioned above, makers of our constitution, in absolute haste to expedite establishment of the Republic, have made many wrong provisions that have damaged our democracy. Article 93 as well as Article 178 are two such wrong provisions. both of these Articles are identical. They provide for election of the Speaker from amongst the members of the Houses. This provision equips the ruling party or ruling coalition to elect a person from its/their side as the Speaker and once elected, the power that position bestows upon the person is so alluring that it is not surprising if a Speaker sides with the government. If the role of Chatterjee in nuke deal matter in the last Loksabha could be cited as an instance, non-formation of JPC over the spectrum scam by the Speaker of the present Loksabha may not be any different.

Hence it is urgent that the Speaker should be a non-political person and should be directly elected by the people under direct supervision of the election commission. There must be a blatant ban on political parties taking any interest in the Speaker’s election. This is essential for health of Indian Parliament.

Otherwise, as Dr. Ambedkar had portended, Indian sovereignty would crumble down due to commission agents taking over as Prime Ministers and birds of their feathers in both the sides of the Houses creating environment of continuous adjournments and collapse of their businesses.


Subhas Chandra Pattanayak

Mainstream communists, hobnobbing with capitalists, even with the direct agents of the imperialists, have almost forfeited their credibility.

Ever since the impatient ultras ripped apart the Communist Party of India and formed the CPI (M), communism has suffered set back in the country where it could have been the natural refuge for the massive majority of the countrymen. There was time when not only the common man in India was dreaming of emancipation by allying with the communists, but also eminent intellectuals, patriotic poets, authors, artists, professors, jurists and lawyers were priding in supporting the Communists. There was time when despite their lower numbers in legislatures, Communists were the politicians that were rated highest in political credibility.

But eagerness to grab power divided the party. And the same eagerness divided the branched off segment leading to subsequent fragmentation thereof in blatant disregard to the urgent need of Communist unity.

The development has become so chaotic that when mainstream Communists are making compromises to capture or stay in power, ultras are using guns in pursuit of power.

Both the syndromes are killing Communism.

People are no more being educated on why Communism is necessary. No time for this. Cadres are shrinking. Confusion is rising. Communist credibility is receding.

Change of this scenario is necessary for the country.

But the mainstream Communists have fallen so pathetically deep in the labyrinth of power that they will no more be able to extricate themselves unless they identify India as a plutocracy and refuse to participate in elections that only help plutocracy to emerge stronger. By refusing to participate in elections, the Communists can generate a shock wave that would make Indians think afresh about democracy and define their duty towards the motherland as was dreamt of by martyrs and freedom fighters.

Mainstream communists should convince the people that their attempts to save India from plutocracy through their parliamentary participation have failed; because elections in a plutocracy further weaken democracy.

So, in order to save democracy, people must first be educated on and against plutocracy.

Participants in elections cannot convince people about this.

Hence, mainstream Communists should declare to stay away from elections and if they really refuse to stand for or plant candidates in any constituency, a new thinking process shall start to save Indian democracy from plutocracy. If they fail to do this, they should be viewed as equal with the capitalists and entirely rejected.

In fact, the people have started rejecting the mainstream Communists because of their participation in electoral politics. This has helped the ultras such as the Maoists or Naxals to grow in stature as they are perceived as people without selfish motive for power.

But their activities are in no way conducive to Communism.

Killing contractors or corrupt officials or small traders or political sophomores is not Communism.

Because of this mistake, the exploitive State has been projecting them as terrorists, even as they are in such restless run that they are unable to educate the people about how the State is exploitive.

On the other hand, by raising guns against individuals they have failed to raise revolution against the capitalist system. This is evidenced in the fact that there is no revolution against the system in the areas they are active. People have stayed distant from them, even though they know; it is only because of them the pro-rich government makes provisions for their welfare.

These ultras are the last hope for our country. They are the ones that are far from electoral politics. They can maintain their aversion to election under the pro-rich constitution. Therefore, they can raise the revolution against the plutocratic system if they shun killing any human.

They ought to understand that the exploitive State might be engaging hired killers to kill persons in their name just to project them as terrorists. As long as they use guns against any in the areas they are active, there would certainly stay scope for misleading the gullible people to believe that such planted killers are also ultra Communists. Thereby distance between the common man and Communism will continue to grow. The real revolution will fail to rise.

Hence, if the Naxals are for Communism, they should shun terrorism.


Subhas Chandra Pattanayak

BIJU Patnaik was the tallest man of Orissa during his days and he was a charismatic man whose foes were also his admirers on various grounds.

Many people say, he had noticeable respect for his critics. Yet, during his last term in office, the Press Accreditation Rules was amended with retrospective effect to demolish my professional status, because my animadversions on his public life were not palatable to the power hankering man. Lest the hidden design comes out, the mandarines had used the amendment against my group. We had challenged this mischief in the Orissa High Court and won the battle. His government had got a stricture.

But I must admit, he was a man, who had profound appreciations for the brave. I will narrate an experience.

bijubabu watchig scpDespite failure of conciliation, the Government was not referring an industrial dispute for adjudication.It was a dispute between a working journalist and a newspaper with which the then Chief Minister was directly involved. I was the Secretary of Orissa Union of Journalists and was conducting the case from the journalist’s side. The Industrial Disputes Act has given a carte blanche to the Government to decide whether or not a dispute should be referred for adjudication. As this carte blanche was being misused in the instant case, I had declared to set fire to the I.D.Act before the Assembly in order to force legislative attention to misuse of the law. On being notified of this, Biju Patnaik rushed to the spot. The Assembly was in session. The area was full of armed police. Setting fire to a law of the land in front of the Assembly when the House was in session was certainly not without risk. But with Biju Patnaik witnessing the event, the police stayed transfixed. Such was his charisma. The Government had to declare instantly in the House that the dispute shall be referred for adjudication sans any delay.

I feel sorry to say that his son Naveen Patnaik, incumbent Chief Minister of my State, has made this charismatic man a posthumous political disease from which Orissa needs relief if democracy is to be kept in good health.

The two latest instances of the mischief are Biju Kandhamal Yojana and Biju Gajapati Yojana,for which the state Exchequer is being forced to cough up funds. These are of the same genre as is the existing exchequer eater Biju KBK Yojana.

In these two new designs, every Block of the two districts of Kandhamal and Gajapati would get Rs.1.5 crores each from the state revenue for injecting into the minds of the most illiterate, undernourished and gullible inhabitants of those undeveloped areas that it is Biju whose posthumous grace is being available to them through his son in the form of basic amenities.

The CM has kept a set of words like “dreams of Biju Patnaik” to attire these State funded works for their use as political traps to catch voters. Everybody knows, though an alien to Orissa, he could become its Chief Minister, when after Biju’s demise, his sycophants shrewdly cultivated the common man’s obituary sympathy for his family to grow into ballots in his favor in the immediate elections that followed. And, he knows that as long as the peoples are kept befooled by coinages like “dreams of Biju” matching every possible State funded welfare programme getting named after him, there should be no difficulty in goading the gullible voters into his support. This is why Navin has been forcing the State Exchequer to fund projects named after his father.

No doubt, Biju was a big man with many fans. But he was such a man who had more foes than fans in Orissa. He had made many of his fans become foes because of his practice of corruption when in power. As here in these pages we have shown several times, once successful in hoodwinking gullible people of Orissa to grab power, he was soon being marked for contempt against the peoples and all-round corruption and the people of Orissa were not taking rest till terminating his tenure. Records of election show that once elected, he was being turned down at least twice in elections in Orissa. So naming welfare programs after him like the three noted supra is nothing but misuse of State exchequer by the incumbent Chief Minister for self and family glorification, which read with the September Order of the Supreme Court against UP CM Mayawati’s statue building spree, is illegal.

Glorification of players of power game at the expense of the State Exchequer is a disease that has affected democracy in India. The name of this disease in Orissa is Biju Patnaik.

Democracy needs be saved from it.



Subhas Chandra Pattanayak

India is in the battlefield to save her democracy. It can be saved only if Election 2009 rejects political factotumism.

All the political parties except the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and the left parties are parties of political factotums.

The non-BJP and non-Left parties have no internal democracy. They of course have their respective party constitutions and on provisions thereof, committees like working committee or political affairs committee etc. But these are only contrived to show that they honor democracy and therewith to hoodwink the election commission and the gullible peoples of this country. In reality, individuals own them. The factotums claiming to be members of any of these parties call their masters or owners as high command; but the media has developed the habit of describing the owner of such a party as supremo. A supremo or the high command appoints any of his or her faithful factotums to any post in the party at any point of time and the person so appointed feels no shame in celebrating the said appointment. K.P.Singhdeo’s proud assertion, after being “appointed” President of Orissa Pradesh Congress Committee, that he is a Sainik of Sonia provides us with an instant instance.

There are only two political ideologies in the world: Capitalism and Socialism. In India, BJP has its real creed in Capitalism (in Indian language, Punjivad), the Left parties in Socialism (Samajvad). Political Science recognizes these two isms as isms of democracy (Ganatantra). Hence we can say, Punjivad and Samajvad, notwithstanding difference in application, are applied form of Ganatantravad (Democratism). But the Congress and its descendants like Trinamul Congress, Rastravadi Congress etc and individual outfits like the Biju Janata Dal of Orissa do not belong to any of these two ideologies. Their common character suggests that they have developed Factotumism, which in Indian language can best be called Golamvad.

Election 2009 has called upon the citizens of India to choose any of the two isms: Democratism and Factotumism. To say if they support Ganatantravad or they support Golamvad.

If India is to be saved, Ganatantravad is to b supported and Golamvad is to be discarded.

In other words, in the present context, if India is to be saved, BJP is to be supported. This is unavoidable for a democrat, as the other practitioners of democracy, the Left Parties, have established that they are too confused to be relied upon.

The allegation of communalism raised against the BJP is not relevant; because every political party in India is communal.

Communalism is display of personal religious preference in public. Any display of religious symbols or manners in public that may not match with the religious practice of everybody in the society is communalism. Why a Manmohan Singh displays his turban in the public? Just to project himself as a Sikh. This is communalism. Why a Navin Patnaik starts electioneering from the citadel of Sri Jagannath? Just to display that he is loyal to the Almighty of Sri Mandira in whom the peoples of Orissa find the unending stream to quench all their religious thirst. Is he not communal? Who of the Communists have opposed public worship of Durga or Kali in Kolkata? Are they secular? Or conversely, are they not communal?

So communalism is not the crux of concern at the moment.

The crux of concern is whether India shall stay a democracy.

India cannot survive as a democracy if political parties afflicted with supremo-syndrome occupy power. The factors and practitioners of factotumism must be kept away from power to ensure that democracy is put in hands of parties that practice democracy in their own organization.

In view of this, Communists having forfeited their credibility by shameless hobnobbing with agents of imperialism, Manmohan Singh yesterday and Navin Patnaik today, the only available practitioner of democracy in India is BJP.

And hence, if democracy is to be saved, in Election 2009, BJP is to be helped and helped by all the progressive people so that post-elections, it may morally distance itself from Arun Shouries and Pramod Mahajans and discard the plutocratic tenets that the Congress party under Sonia Gandhi with Manmohan Singh as the Prime Minister has crippled the country with.


Subhas Chandra Pattanayak

Navin Patnaik should quit the Chief Minister post simply because he was in this post as the leader of a pre-election coalition that has now collapsed.

His continuation in office would be illogical, immoral, imprudent and illegal.

If he does not resign on his own accord, the Governor should dismiss him on the ground that termination of the coalition has automatically terminated his position as leader of the coalition. He was the CM in the capacity of the leader of the coalition. When the coalition is dead, navin has no capacity to be treated as head of the coalition. So he is no more entitled to continue as the CM.

The only legal act that is bound to take place in this context is resignation or dismissal of Navin Patnaik from the post of the chief Minister.

To retain him in this post for a moment would be disregard of democracy on part of the Governor.

But the Governor can appoint him as the CM again within minutes after accepting his resignation or dropping him from the CM post. The Governor can even proceed to appoint the members of his cabinet under advice of Navin after he is appointed afresh as the CM.

The Governor ought to know that anything other than this will be illegal and anti-democracy.


Subhas Chandra Pattanayak

Every Indian is proud of the fact that he / she belongs to the Republic of India. But every patriotic Indian is embarrassed over the fact that this Republic stands synonymous with contradiction and corruption. This is because; post-independence India has failed to honor the wishes of its founding fathers.

The father of the nation, Mahatma Gandhi, had expressly wished that in free India, the Governments must keep in mind the poorest person while drafting the Plans for the country. His followers reduced his wishes to mere wishful thinking. When Congressmen are busy in competition to become factotums of Sonia Gandhi, why should we think that they could at any point of time have given importance to Mahatma Gandhi? History cannot but say that the Congress Government that stepped into power immediately after independence would be remembered for two things: one, for failure to save Gandhiji from the assassin and two, for declaring the Communist Party of India illegal so that in Constitution making, the propertied class should face no problem in safe guarding its own interest.

Giving vent to his deep dissatisfaction over failure to protect poor peoples’ interest in the Constitution, in his concluding address to the Constituent Assembly, Dr. B.R.Ambedkar had noted, “On 26th January 1950, we are going to enter into a life of contradiction. In politics we will have equality and in social and economic rights, we will have inequality. In politics we will be recognizing the principle of one man and one vote, one value. In our social and economic rights we shall by reason of our social and economic structure, continue to deny one man, one value.” (Constituent Assembly Debates, Vol.XI, p.979)

This inequality, as analyzed by Shibanikinkar Chaube in ‘Constituent Assembly of India’ (PPH, 1973), was caused by “the pressure of the propertied class”.

When President Rajendra Prasad was to admit that “the defects are inherent in the situation in the country”(Constituent Assembly Debates, Vol.XI, p.993), Dr. Ambedkar had expressed serious doubts over longevity of the Republic. “We must remove this contradiction at the earliest possible moment or else those who suffer from inequality will blow up the structure of political democracy which this Assembly has so laboriously built up”, he had warned.

But Governments of India have never heeded to his warning as a result of which India has already become two Indias.

Political equality has kept the geographical India in tact, but economic inequality has brought majority of Indians look at a handful of Indians as of a different India, best captioned in apolitical popular slogans like “Tere India mahan, mere Bharat pareshan”, which roughly means, your India may be great, but my Bharat is in turmoil.

We must try to stop this rising feeling of two Indias. We must cast off hypocrisy to admit that Ambedkar’s warning not heeded to, the victims of inequality have started to “blow up the structure of political democracy” that the founding fathers of Indian Republic had “so laboriously built up”. Terminating Naxals by military guns or using State terror to silent the oppressed poor will not close up the gap between these two Indias. Elimination of economic inequality will do.

But how has economic inequality become so massive? A man who was working for a paltry sum of Rs.300/- only per month three decades prior to his death died as the owner of around Rs.70,000 Crores and the luminaries of this country beginning from the Prime Minister to newspaper editors, instead of telling the nation as to where from and how he earned this massive money, cried over his death like widows cry over the pyres of their husbands!

This syndrome has encouraged the mafia. And, in our country, where Laws are so rampant, no mafia could have grown without backing of the Law Enforcement Authorities (LEA).

This gives us a sad feeling of black sheep presence in our LEAs that includes also the Judiciary.

It is not for nothing that a demand for disclosure of properties of Judges is so constant.

Many a judges even of higher judiciary have exhibited such conduct that not only the Chief Justice or Collegiums of Judges have felt the need for action against them, but also the general public has started looking at Judges askance. Peoples have started believing the Cinema depictions that behind every high profile mafia, there must be a Judge!

In such circumstances, it is better for the republic if property-list of every public functionary including the members of Judiciary, whosoever draws salary from taxpayer’s money is disclosed.

To avoid embarrassment over disclosure on demand, the property list of every public functionary should be authentically posted in the Internet in the portals of the institution he or she works with.

The Chief Justice of India Hon’ble Justice K G Balakrishnan in a recent response has disapproved the necessity of property disclosure in respect of senor Judges.

It is really indecent to ask the Judges to disclose their properties list. It connotes to expressing no confidence on Judges. Ethically it is not proper.

Personally I may stand with the views of the CJI as to me, Judiciary being the last refuge of our peoples, Judges should never be subjected to peoples asking for their properties list.

But as India is crumbling into two Indias, as observed supra, it is imperative that to equip peoples for defeating plutocracy and for putting leash on corruption that has so far served plutocracy and savagely widened the gap between economically unequal peoples of the country and to save the motherland from the “contradiction” so correctly pointed out by Dr. Ambedkar, the Judges should post their properties list in the respective portals of the High Courts and the Supreme Court for anybody to see that without indulging in demands to know of their properties under the Right To Information Act.

It should be appropriate for the Judges to appreciate that notwithstanding all the respects, we the general public of India unambiguously pay them, they are not and cannot be the Lords over the Republic.


Subhas Chandra Pattanayak

Orissa Legislative Assembly has ousted Congress member Tarakant Bahinipati for seven days as on adoption of a treasury bench motion to suspend him the Speaker decided to enforce it on 11th December.

Bahinipati attracted the harsh decision by venturing to hit the Speaker with an earphone though that had missed the target. It was an affront to dignity of the House, members felt. Bahinipati also felt the same way; but explained his action as a reaction to anti-democratic conduct of the treasury side.

After successfully stonewalling the House the preceding day on the ground of absence of a white paper in respect to the official notice calling attention on killing of Laxmananand and consequent communal violence in Kandhamal that turned into exposing the government’s reluctance to provide the same for use as the base of debate, the Opposition on 11th December allowed the House to proceed so that its own version as well as the government’s could be kept on records and the reality could be known.

And, thus the House started to proceed on Kandhamal issue.

And, thus the House came to hear what the Deputy Leader of Opposition, Narasingha Mishra, known for clear comprehension and in-depth analysis of any issue in hand, was to say on Kandhamal.

Mishra began his speech by razing down the “rosy picture” painted by the initiator of the debate, government chief whip, B.K.Arukh on the present situation in Kandhamal. This district, he reminded the government, is one of the most backward districts of India, where Schedule Tribes constitute 52 per cent and Schedule Castes 17 per cent of its total population. But 90 per cent of its population perish Below-the-Poverty-Line (BPL) with an average per capita income of Rs.4, 743/- as against Rs.5,264/- in other districts of Orissa in the same segment, he showed from statistical reports. And roared, is it the evidence of development that the government boasts of? And then, as he proceeded, he cited certain documents on records in print media to show the darker side of the communal flare up at Kandhamal, the core issue of the particular debate.

Giving vent to his suspicion that Laxmananand’s murder might have been the BJP’s handiwork in executing its stratagem to cultivate communal support in approaching elections, he went ahead to support his apprehensions with circumstantial evidences, to the utmost discomfort of the BJP members of the treasury benches.

He cited newspaper reports to show how contemptuously Togadia of saffron combine had alleged that it was Chief Minister Navin Patnaik’s chilling nonchalance that had facilitated the murder of Laxmananand.

And, as bruised BJP members were at a loss to understand how to stop Mishra’s trigger, he went on to show how Laxmananand was a destroyer of societal solidarity in the affected district in the name of religion and how he was the arch villain behind the 1994 caste conflicts that in acrimony had surpassed every conceivable violence in that district.

Even as no action was taken against perpetrators of that crime against the community, it is the BJP’s alliance government that surreptitiously withdrew the security cover from Laxmananand before his murder in the night of August 23, 2008, although as many as 26 hours before the murder, he had informed the Police that there was threat to his life.

After the murder of Laxmanananda BJP has tried to use him posthumously for consolidation of its vote bank, but its coalition government has not net in the real murderer.

This, he said, points the needle of suspicion for the murder of Laxmananand to the BJP and its allies, which they might have done in thirst for votes.

He cited the instance of Kendrapara where a BJP leader had organized bombardment on the house of another leader of his own party with the motive to project the crime as an act of Muslims, so that communal passions ignited against the minority community could have helped the saffronists in having a new polarized vote bank in their favor. There is no reason not to see the same modus operandi in the murder of Laxmananand, Mishra thundered.

Referring to Togadia’s tirades as reported by the Press, Mishra wondered as to how and why the BJP Ministers sharing the dais with Togadia at that time were not taken to task for having not protested against the acerbic words hurled at their Chief Minister. Recitation of the reported words by Mishra was unbearable for the BJD members and even as they squealed, Mishra went ahead to cite Puri Sankaracharya who had alleged that it is the Chief Minister who alone should be held responsible for the murder. The CM, Mishra wondered, was unable to stop the crime as he was dependent on the Sangh Parivar to stay in power and the Sangh Parivar was to make a sacrifice of Laxmanananda at the altar of their ambition that could be fulfilled only through electoral politics. To put his apprehensions on a supportive base, he read out a letter of the Sangh Parivar that was pregnant with the conspiracy as published in a printed edition of Lokamat.

This was more than enough for the BJP members and their BJD allies to digest. They rushed into the well of the Hall demanding deletion of Mishra’s citations.

Under the waves of uproar that soon engulfed the House, Kalpataru Das of BJD was allowed to raise a point of order when Ms. Draupadi Murmu of BJP was in the Chair and as Das started saying, the microphone of Mishra was laid inoperative. The Opposition stood in protest and the pandemonium took a turn towards the worse. In that oral free for all environment inside the Hall, Bahinipati ventured the most condemnable offense against the Chair. He whisked out an earphone and hurled it at the august authority. Democracy was defiled as never before in the very heart of its throne.

Rightly he has been put under suspension. His is an offense that no lover of democracy can tolerate.

But it is also a fact that had the House not been goaded by the treasury bench members into the environment that precipitated the offense, what happened might not have happened at all.

If the peoples of the State are now unable to know the behind the screen reality that could have addressed appropriately to the issue put on agenda of the Assembly by the treasury side itself, whom to blame except the treasury side?


Subhas Chandra Pattanayak

Orissa has a Government that evidently has inadequate IQ. Going by Chief Minister Navin Patnaik’s statement in the Assembly on December 3, one may arrive at this determination.

The Assembly is in doldrums since commencement of the current session following media exposure of sex escapades of Revenue Minister Manmohan Samal.

The offense allegedly occurred at New Delhi in the official guesthouse of Government of Orissa.

It was alleged that Samal was frequently but clandestinely visiting a married woman namely Sanghamitra Singh in Suit No 1103 of Orissa Niwas at 4, Bordolai Marg, where he had lodged her between 4th and 7th of November 2008. During that period, he himself was staying in suit No. 305 of Orissa Bhawan at 1, Niti Marg, New Delhi.

The suits in Orissa Niwas are secured by self-closing doors so that guests enjoy absolute privacy. The inside is not at all viewable from outside. Hence Samal’s visit to the woman and spending hours inside the room was not discernible to anybody from outside the suit.

Naturally therefore Samal generated suspicion. His conduct was abnormal. He was there without being specifically required under administrative exigencies to be there.

He on his own accord has not yet disclosed in which official work his visit to New Delhi was needed by the State and what exact official duty he discharged there during the relevant period.

He is guilty of suppression of facts in his statement that he made to the Assembly inasmuch as he has not informed the House of why he was at New Delhi and why had he lodged the woman in Orissa Niwas and why he had not disclosed to the Home (Protocol) Department that he was taking a woman with him as a part of his duty and lodging her in the Orissa Niwas through his O.S.D. and why he was clandestinely visiting that woman in Orissa Niwas instead of summoning her openly to his suit in Orissa Bhawan if at all his official position was needed to be employed for negotiation with guests to grace the so-called Salandi Mahotsava.

Media exposures made public deduce that the affair was not in consonance with manners expected of a Minister. In popular parlance sex escapade became the catching line.

The Assembly in session was gravely aggrieved over the worst assault on credibility and dignity of peoples’ representatives as a whole that the Minister’s alleged misconduct generated.

Instead of voluntarily placing his version before the House when the affair was exposed in obnoxious terms in media, Samal used evasive tactics so much that the scenario blazed up to the extent of putting the speaker in a predicament in accepting his oral clarifications.

In an unprecedented display of disgust, the Speaker had to direct Samal to submit his clarification, if any, in form of a statement.

And, when Samal complied with that direction, he was found by the Opposition as too evasive to be taken as truthful.

It therefore demanded that the Chief Minister should give the House the clear picture in terms of ministerial accountability.

But the CM has in his statement, notwithstanding admitting that the Minister was marked to have visited the woman several times during the period under question, has asked the Opposition to show proof, if any, of illicit affairs the Minister had with that woman!

The CM should have told the House as to how the conduct of Samal in contravening protocol by leaving Orissa Bhawan unescorted and visiting the woman in her suit in Orissa Niwas clandestinely and spending hours with her inside the closed room was not unbecoming of a Minister.

He should have stated before the House as to whether the Minister was unavoidably required by the State to spend the relevant period at New Delhi with details of official works he was required to do and has done in reality at New Delhi and if the woman was officially sponsored to justify the Minister’s investing official time in her attendance.

He has failed to understand the importance and urgency of enlightening the Opposition on this sordid matter that has spread suspicion on conduct of his cabinet colleague.

He should have understood the necessity of proving that his colleague has not done any wrong to earn condemnation as is being stressed upon by the Opposition.

He should have found out the truth through sharp and specific investigation by the intelligence wing, specifically as he has admitted to have received confidential communications from the Resident Commissioner, New Delhi about the clandestine visits of the minister to the woman he had lodged unofficially in the official guesthouse and should have stated categorically, if the Minister was not guilty of any misconduct on the basis such intelligence investigation.

But he has not done this.

And on the other hand, by coming into the Hall at the summit of a long stalemate in the house and leaving it immediately after reading out a prepared statement that was vitiated by a poser to the Opposition as hinted to supra, he has generated an impression that the Government is either shying at the House in imposing accountability or lacks in IQ to understand that the Minister’s unescorted visit to the woman staying in Orissa Niwas where for her stay his Officer on Special Duty was used is something that needs no proof to show that the said Minister’s conduct was questionable and hence that calls for action.

No earlier Government in Orissa had such inadequate IQ.


Subhas Chandra Pattanayak

President-Elect Barack Obama has ushered in a new dawn to US of America. This can safely be said without waiting to watch his actions as the President because his victory has made it clear that he has inspired his countrymen to end the anarchy that had shattered their economy. Over and above affecting financial stability, Bush, whose rule he has ended, had squandered away the nation’s exchequer in intimidating peoples of other countries, who did not allow themselves to be cowed down by his design. Obama’s victory portends end of that design. Therefore, his post-election utterances can be compressed to say that a new dawn has already touched US.

But his declaration to continue partnership with India is a matter to ponder over. The India with Man Mohan Singh as Prime minister that the outgoing US President had dragged into partnership is not the India, which the peoples of India had liberated from foreign yoke. Singh has cleverly sabotaged the India of Indians and has replaced democracy with plutocracy. Peoples of India will welcome Obama to have partnership with democratic India but will sure resist if he tries to continue partnership with the plutocratic India. Like peoples of USA ended the Bush misrule, patriotic Indians shall soon terminate the Singh misrule too.

Then, and only then, if democracy revives in India, peoples of this country may value partnership with Obama’s US; because by then, the new dawn might have blossomed there into day.


Subhas Chandra Pattanayak

They know, like what happened in confidence motion, Prime Minister Man Mohan Singh will get shields in the privilege motion in the Parliament in the matter of the nuke deal. Hence the Communists’ endeavor to usher in victory of Indian democracy will not succeed. A living democracy may march towards victory, not a dead democracy. We are a dead democracy as the democracy we had dreamt of has been replaced by plutocracy by the modern leaders of the Congress Party that the BJP, when in power, had also contributed to. The final deathblow to whatever semblance of democracy was still thriving in the fort of our belief came from the present Prime Minister and his colleagues in the design of the nuke deal with USA. To get back and revive our democracy we need to build up the second war of independence. And the Communists belonging to plutocracy’s opposite ideology can do it. For this, instead of participating in the Parliament, which has become the launching pad of plutocracy, the Communists should quit it and then only they can lead the nation in its much-needed second war of independence.

At this juncture, we may view the nuke deal updates for a moment.

There was free vote in USA both in the House of Representatives and in the Senate on the issue of allowing the USA-India nuke deal. Members of rival political parties supported or opposed it sans any party whip.Indian Parliament was debarred from expressing its wisdom in the matter through votes, as Prime Minister Man Mohan Singh and his colleagues did not want democracy to work.

The USA House of Representative passed the proposal on September 28 and the Senate on 2 October 2008 by majority votes allowing President Bush to go ahead to sign the nuke deal with India. Juxtaposing this scenario with Prime Minister Singh’s year old assertion that the deal is “signed, sealed and non-negotiable” one gets shocked over the vicious game Singh has played against our country.

The deal is a “bonanza for US firms” according to eminent US policy makers as reported by the Reuters on August 5, 2007 and is “so clearly in the interest of the United States” that, Senator Joe Lieberman, known for his role in policy making and proximity to President Bush, had claimed on August 14, 2007 as was immediately reported by the Reuters, that both the Houses of USA Congress would sure support it. And, as we saw, notwithstanding opposition by eminent members of both the Treasury and Opposition, the USA Congress passed it finally on October 2, 2008.

The US House passed it because it fulfills American purpose. Describing the nuke deal with India as “net gain” for USA, the fact sheet presented by US administration states that the US Congress supported the initiative, as “There are powerful security, political, economic, and environmental reasons to support this initiative.” The USA administration is looking forward to a “new strategic partnership with India in a way that will provide global leadership in the years ahead,” the fact sheet notes.

This motive of USA is further elaborated by Republican Senator Richard Lugar from Indiana, considered one of the most cerebral lawmakers in the US Congress, when, in addressing the US National Defense University on October 17 he categorically stated, “The bottom line is that American efforts to shape the world are unlikely to succeed fully without the cooperation of India.”

Recalling how “in response to India’s nuclear programme and tests of nuclear weapons, the United States has systematically denied broad categories of sensitive technology to India,” Lugar admitted that the United States, for decades, had placed India, into a lower tier of nations who were neither friends nor enemies. India responded by helping to lead the Non-aligned Movement in frequent opposition to US global initiatives at the United Nations and elsewhere.” So, according to Lugar, India that has exhibited its power to stay the strongest hurdle for US domination over the Globe, is a power without the cooperation of which “American efforts to shape the world are unlikely to succeed fully.”

This is why USA had been putting all pressures on India to accept her hegemony and had been planting her lobbyists and agents in India’s political positions. India has discussed this American design many times in the Parliament prompting at a time the late Swatantra Party MP Piloo Mody to come into the floor with a badge depicting assertive words, “I am a CIA agent.”

As progressive political outlook in the Country declined in course of extinction of the freedom fighters who had brought us liberty from foreign yoke, agents of plutocracy and lobbyists of USA became able to grab power and finally the United States got its committed man in Man Mohan Singh who pushed the country into its hegemony.

India that had challenged US design to subdue the world and had founded and led the NAM, after Singh grabbed the Prime Minister chair, has made shocking compromises. “We have already received some benefits from this engagement,” said Lugar, as India has been “taking a more positive outlook toward the US military presence in Afghanistan than it did originally.” Further, Lugar pointed out, “It supported our efforts to constrain Iran’s nuclear program through its votes in the IAEA Board of Governors’ in 2005 and 2006,” and added, “India has also taken a more supportive attitude toward the Proliferation Security Initiative, though it has thus far declined to join.”

Singh has repeatedly been saying that the nuke deal will solve India’s energy problems; but this most cerebral lawmaker in the US Congress has unambiguously declared that had this deal not been possible, energy problem of USA would have been unmanageable. To quote him, “The United States’ own energy problems will be exacerbated if we do not forge partnerships in India.” But how this and why? Answer is simple. USA has almost exhausted her uranium resources and is very much in want of fuel for her reactors. India has abundant stock of thorium and pushed into isolation as she was because of American conspiracy, she has developed her own unique technology of using thorium for power generation. In the guise of cooperation and partnership, it would be easy for US to grab thorium from India along with the related technology. More over, USA wants to commission new generation reactors in place of the outdated ones. Life span of a nuclear reactor is 40 years. USA has 103 nuclear reactors at the moment out of which, in September 2008, its Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has given extended life to 49 reactors, nearly half of the US total. Nearly 30 reactors are decommissioned whereas a few such as Fort St Vrain, Big Rock Point and Shoreham have been totally dismantled. The majority is in various stages of dismantling. No wonder with these reactors USA’s energy generation was in such a mess that had India not signed the agreement pledging a market to these decommissioned or about to be decommissioned reactors paving way for USA to commission there the new generation reactors, as Lugar has hinted to above, the United States’ own energy problems would sure have “exacerbated”. So Lugar holds the deal a crowning foreign policy achievement.

In other words, we have a Prime Minister who has helped President Bush to have the crowning foreign policy achievement of USA.

This would never have happened had the Communists of India not helped Singh to become the Prime Minister. Singh in his previous avatar as Finance Minister of Narasimha Rao had sabotaged Indian pledge enshrined in the Constitution to build up India as a socialist country and had opened up Indian economy to pave the path for plutocracy to kill our democracy.

Indian peoples had never voted the Congress Party to form a government. They had only very clearly refused BJP a fresh mandate as the government led by it with Vajpayee as Prime Minister had strengthened plutocracy ushered in by the Congress through Man Mohan Singh. In the hotchpotch that helped the Congress Party to claim the top post Sonia was of course the choice because rightly or wrongly it had fought the elections under her leadership. In fact, general voters who had supported the Congress Party had done so keeping Sonia in mind; never Man Mohan Singh. Had the Congress Party fought the elections in the name of Singh, it would have been totally rejected. The common peoples of India could never have supported the American lobbyist who had craftily rendered the national pledge for making India a socialist democracy inconsequential and ushered in plutocracy. But Sonia did not dare to claim the PM post and instead proposed Singh’s name just at the time when the nation was awaiting a call to her from the President to take oath as the PM. There was enough stick to bit Sonia with to compel her to abdicate her claim. As for example, the episodes involving R.K.Dhavan and Ottavio Quattrochi.

The Thakkar Commission had found the needle of suspicion pointing towards Dhawan in the matter of murder of Mrs. Indira Gandhi, but instead of prosecuting him Sonia’s husband Rajiv Gandhi had rewarded him with powerful positions. Sonia and Dhawan had together taken Mrs. Gandhi to the AIIMS and starting from that till Dhawan’s reemergence as the power center in Rajivraj, the entire episode is shrouded under a mystery that is yet impregnable to the common man; but Rajiv’s wife must be knowing the real reason and if there was any hidden motive, can easily fidget over the possibility of exposure. Similarly sticky were the allegations against her Achilles’ heel Quattrochi in Bofors scandal.

These were such sticks that the powers that could have wanted Singh in the top post might have used to compel Sonia to suppress her aspiration and to suggest Singh’s name in stead for the coveted post.

Had Singh not become the PM, the USA might not have got it so easy to make India sign with it the nuke deal.

But the most baffling political confusion that shocked every supporter of suffering Indians was that the Communists of the country supported Singh in becoming the Prime Minister and helped him retain the position till he organized escape from accountability through the drama of confidence vote. This was perhaps the worst of mistakes that the Communists could ever have committed. But they committed this mistake as otherwise, according to them, the communalist BJP could have grabbed power again.

And, here they erred.

BJP is not the only party in India that is communal. India got divided into Pakistan and Hindustan on communal basis under leadership of the Congress Party. The Constitution of India has stressed that the government should so deal with religion that the peoples would get glimpses of sociological evolution of their country and would develop necessary orientation to study anthropology of religions for socio-scientific consolidation of the entire Indian society. But has the Congress, so overwhelmingly in power for so long time, not tampered with the objectives of the Constitution in this regard and not encouraged religions to ruin national solidarity and integration by allowing rival religions to emerge as political powers? How could the Communists found the Congress as non-communal?

What is communalism? Communalism is assertive display of one’s own religion in the midst of followers of other religions. If the sandalwood mark on Advani’s forehead connotes to Hindu communalism the turban on Man Mohan Singh’s head cannot but be a display of Sikh communalism. Respecting rival religions may be secularism, but displaying one’s own religion is communalism. How could the Communists conceive Mr. Man Mohan Singh as non-communal?

Is there any political party of atheists in India? No. Then all the political parties in India are active or passive peddlers of faith in fate. Faith in fate is absolutely anathema to Scientific Communism because it makes one make tryst with destiny and allows her/himself to tolerate exploitation by a better placed person.

Is there any political party in India that has affinity with atheism? Yes, only the parties of the Communists. So Communists should never have allied with any political party or politician who peddles faith and promote tolerance to exploitation and assist plutocracy.

The Communists should have noted that with emergence of Man Mohan Singh in Indian politics, economic inequality has so widened and exploitation of marginal farmers, daily wage earners, working class members and common consumers has become so ruthless that the political state has become synonymous with an exploitative state leading to dwindling of political nationalism. Hence we see emergence of regional nationalism and sub-regional nationalism. Regional and sub-regional nationalism has often resulted in local chauvinism of which ugly glimpses are recently seen in Maharastra and Bihar in Railways recruitment matter. Nationalism being the base of collective identity of human beings dwelling within given geographical limits, when political nationalism dwindles, peoples rush into religious nationalism to overcome inherent individual sense of insecurity through collective cultural identity that eventually gives birth to communalism. So unless India is changed from the present condition of exploitative state to a socialist state, communalism can never be controlled or foiled. It was a folly on part of the Communists to have supported Congress against BJP to foil communalism.

In order to change India from communalism to political nationalism, Communists must war against plutocracy. They must make peoples know that Indian democracy has already been shanghaied into plutocracy. And to start this war they should relinquish the Parliament that now seems as harboring plutocracy. They should vow not to contest elections as long as peoples are not awakened against plutocracy and every cult of faith in fate is not rejected. The Communists alone can do this because it is they that are ideologically the only ones equipped to exterminate plutocracy.

A man, who loves his motherland, may expect this much from peoples that are politically pure.