Society & Lifestyle
|Analysis||Share This Page|
Why Doesn’t President Intervene?
|by Dr. Rajinder Puri|
Two chief ministers have publicly confessed that they cannot maintain law and order in their respective states.
In West Bengal Chief Minister Miss Mamata Banerjee prevented author Mr. Salman Rushdie from a cultural event planned with film producer Miss Deepa Mehta. Both Mr. Rushdie and Miss Mehta are law abiding citizens. They were banned entry into Kolkata because the state government feared agitation by their critics. Trinamul government minister Mr. Saugata Roy explained on a TV channel that 100 people had gathered at the airport to protest against Mr. Rushdie’s arrival. Therefore, he argued, the government was justified in taking steps to avoid disorder.
Neither Miss Jayalalithaa nor Miss Banerjee alleged any wrongdoing by the law abiding citizens whose liberty was curtailed. Both chief ministers justified their actions by admitting that their respective governments feared the consequences arising from threats leveled by citizens who did not like Mr. Haasan and Mr. Rushdie respectively.
In other words both chief ministers publicly admitted that they were coerced into acting against law abiding citizens because of threats by critics. Because the chief ministers could not handle those who threatened to take the law into their own hands they deprived the rights of citizens who lived within the law. Both chief ministers by their actions have created a precedent for others to coerce the government with threats in order to have their way. Not surprisingly, some observers calculate that the conduct of Muslims and the governments in both states have greatly boosted Mr. Narendra Modi’s prospects of becoming prime minister.
|More by : Dr. Rajinder Puri|
|Views: 1133 Comments: 2|
Comments on this Article
02/04/2013 02:07 AM
02/02/2013 04:04 AM
|Top | Analysis|