FOCUS

AAP INFARCTION

Is Kejriwal the villain !

Clean politics, which is being referred to as alternative politics has always been the yearning of a significant section of Indians, who had grown cynical with the established political parties. Aam Aadmi Party founded by Shanti Bhushan, a former Law Minister, his son, Prashant Bhushan, a senior Supreme Court Lawyer, Yogendra Yadav, a Professor and well known socio-political scientist, Arvind Kejriwal, the blue eyed boy of Anna Hazare movement and few other likeminded thinkers and doers, came as a breath of fresh air.

At a time, when most people had lost faith in mainstream political parties, this AAP, formed by educated, committed and principled gentlemen did hold out a promise of  value based principled politics. From November 2012, when the party was formed, the politics of this country did not remain same.

Election that came in 2013, has shown the potential of AAP. But committed a blunder by resigning after 49 days in office. It was the decision of one man, Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal, without consulting his Political Affairs Committee, and his electorates, who had asked him to form the government, took upon himself as a custodian of scruples in public life, to quit the government, ostensibly because, he failed to bring about the passage of Lokpal Bill due to the Congress party’s chicanery. It was an opportunity that not only AAP lost, to convey its seriousness in governance, it gave a whole lot of negative publicity to the party. It was a situation AAP could have lived without.

Loksabha Election came and AAP thought it can pull a surprise. It contested some 400+seats. But quitting the Delhi govt in 49 days, had created a deep gash in the public memory. Both Congress and BJP, mercilessly exploited the peoples’ disillusionment. Except in Punjab, it drew blank all over the country. But it did help create a space in the public domain.

Months that followed, did witness, all kinds of efforts to revive the sagging morale of AAP. More than anybody, its volunteers spread all over India tried to keep it alive by not losing hope in a better India and better politics.

In the meanwhile, there have been attempts at roping Congress MLAs, to form a government by hook or by crook. Having quit the government in 49 days, to again hanker for power, was certainly sending wrong signals. Yogendra Yadav and some others were opposed to the idea. Kejriwal’s insistence on having his way, was certainly creating irritants in the smooth functioning of  the party.

Sazia Ilmi, one of the more pleasant, liberal and articulative face of Indian Muslims, called it a day with AAP, accusing Kejriwal of being autocratic. All thought Sazia Ilmi was being fussy. After remaining without any political allegiance, she joined BJP months later. She is a right person in a wrong party.

Delhi election came by and the rest as the cliché goes is history. The unprecedented, electoral victory gave Kejriwal the power he wanted. The power to do what he wanted within his power as the convenor of AAP.

After the 49 days El dorado with the Delhi government, there have been instances of differences cropping up within the AAP leadership. There were questions being raised about the party’s constitution which suggested one-man one-position. Shanti Bhushan, the patriarch of AAP family had proposed change at the top after Arvind Kejriwal became the Chief Minister. Sr. Bhushan not only had the moral authority of an elder gentleman, with impeccable legal background, he had also contributed the first revenue for the party. Reportedly he had given `1 crore as the first contribution of AAP.

Shanti Bhushan, had reportedly suggested Yogendra Yadav as the convenor to replace Kejriwal. Looking back, it was not taken kindly by Kejriwal, who began to nurse a dislike of Sr. Bhushan.

There were other founding members, with whom he was distancing himself from. Yogendra Yadav and Prashant Bhushan, were singled out for his dislike. If Prashant Bhushan was the son of Sr Bhushan, Yogendra Yadav appeared to Kejriwal as his competitor. Was it because Prashant Bhushan has a formidable background or Yogendra Yadav was a respected public intellectual? The chasm grew quietly but steadily. It subtly started appearing that individual is greater than the institution.

The unprecedented victory in the Feb. 2015 Delhi election, made Kejriwal confident that whatever he does shall pass the muster. He had, in the mean while, strengthened his position in the party. 

He meticulously planned that it was not his proposal, but the Political Affairs Committee (PAC) decided to remove these two tall leaders of AAP, Yogendra & Prashant from PAC. That would leave him as the ‘Supremo’. But the subsequent meet of the National Executive (NE) comprehensively exposed that it was Kejrwial and Kejriwal alone who wanted these two leading lights of AAP out of PAC & NE. His stand was clear “Its me or them, both cannot be in the party.” The tele talk, the previous night, where he had used the terms “would have been kicked out” (laath marke nikaalthe the) against Yadav-Bhushan duo, made it very clear his veiled intentions.

Thus he clearly wanted that he will have no dissent to his leadership in the party. This was a clear negation of the fundamental principle of democracy, transparency and collective leadership, on which AAP was baptised. These two, most respected gentlemen in the public space were condemned unheard as - gaddhars  - traitors. That was the unkindest cut that Arvind Kejriwal, who was made convenor by the founding members, inflicted on these two founding members. 

In his zeal to take full control, Kejriwal unceremoniously dropped even Admiral Ramdas, the internal Lokpal of AAP. He even removed Dharmvir Gandhi, the Punjab M.P, as the leader of AAP Loksabha team, since Gandhi questioned the propriety and legality of the removal of M/s Yadav & Bhushan. 

On questioning the removal of Admiral Ramdas, the explanation given by Kejriwal’s spokesperson was, ‘his term as Lokpal had expired’. But ‘when did it expire?’, the question was never answered. 

Commenting on the development, a Mumbai based national newspaper had commented “So, the dream of a new politics, clean politics, lies shattered, smashed to million pieces, by the skullduggery of its latest and foremost salesman, Arvind Kejriwal. The AAP leader’s Hitlerian mindset has killed the AAP experiment. Now all that is left is yet another, one man party, a la Mulayam Singh’s Samajawadi Party or Mayawathi’s Bahujan Samaj Party”

What is the rationale of this removal of Yogendra Yadav and Prashant Bhushan along with two of their supporters, Prof Anand Kumar of JNU and Prof Ajit Jha? Did he feel threatened by their eminence and clean public image? The paper said, “They were well meaning professionals widely respected in their respective spheres of work. Yadav is a social scientist who made his name as a psephologist. Bhushan is a senior Supreme Court Lawyer who has championed diverse public causes and spearheaded epochal PIL cases such as the 2-G and the Coal Scam”. So, could it be that, he wanted no opposition to whatever he had in mind for AAP and its future!

But AAP is not his alone. It belongs to all those, thousands of volunteers, besides Yadav, Bhushan, Kumar and the likes, who toiled and funded for the evolution of AAP.

How can Arvind Kejriwal do what he did? There appears to be a purge. He was not satisfied with their ouster from the policy making bodies, PAC & NE, he even got them removed from the party itself.

Recapitulating the NE meeting of 28th March, the paper says “Days before Saturday’s disorderly and even violent show of strength by Kejriwal and his fawning supporters at a farm house on the outskirts of Delhi, there was enough evidence that the decision to throw out the naysayers from the party was already taken. Kejriwal came, delivered the set piece charge-sheet against the Yadav-Bhushan duo and left, leaving the dirty work to be accomplished by his henchmen. The 'accused' were not allowed to say a word in their defence. Indira Gandhi in her heyday had conducted herself with a little more dignity than this mid-level revenue service babu-turned-self-styled-anti-corruption neta”.

Sagarika Ghose, a former editorial team member of CNN/IBN, writing in the Times of India, terming both Yadav and Bhushan as statesmen had this encomium, “Soft-spoken dignified Yadav is one of India’s sharpest political minds. On TV as well as academic circles, few have the acute grasp of Indian politics that he does. Bhushan is an upright and indefatigable lawyer–activist who has fought for many unpopular causes.” And she continued “Ousted rebels YY & PB weren’t accused of any kind of personal impropriety. Their only fault was that they failed to realise the folly of questioning someone anointed with a massive mandate. Yadav and Bhushan could never have been street smart cadres of AAP, rather they provided the party’s moral and intellectual appeal and its distinctive voice. It’s a tragedy that with the departure of Yogendra Yadav AAP has lost its Bhishma.”

Indeed AAP led by Arvind Kejriwal is bereft of intellectual backbone. Would it survive? May be ‘Yes’! But he has broken the hearts of thousands of volunteers across the country and have dashed the hopes of millions of Indians, who had hoped for a better India where both values and laws are respected. If 2015 elections have catapulted Kejriwal as a Hero, the aftermath, the unnecessary and highly condemnable ‘blood letting’ has reduced him to be a villain. In a situation, where winner takes all, he is no doubt ‘Jo Jeetha Wahi Sikander’. But then the original Sikander – Alexander the great – did not last long, is a historical truth. Thus, the question, what next? is  haunting YY/PB & Company and those about 4000 volunteers of AAP who had gathered at the Swaraj Samwad on 14th April at Gurgoan.

J.Shriyan