Thiruvananthapuram, October 9 (Daily Kiran) : The Communist Party of India (Marxist) is rallying behind Pinarayi Vijayan after the Kerala High Court directed the filing of a First Information Report (FIR) against the former Chief Minister and current Leader of Opposition in the state. This development has brought to light a nearly two-decade-old statement from Prakash Karat, the former general secretary of CPI(M).
In February 2009, when Vijayan was implicated in the SNC-Lavalin case, calls for his resignation arose. At that time, Karat asserted that since Vijayan held no government position, there was no question of him stepping down. Vijayan was then serving as the state secretary of the party without any official responsibilities.
Karat emphasized that the party would fight on both political and legal fronts in that instance. Today, the same argument is resurfacing, but with a significant difference. Vijayan is no longer just a party official; he is the Leader of Opposition in the Kerala Assembly, a role that carries the status of a cabinet minister.
This shift raises questions about whether the rationale used in 2009 can still apply to a leader in a constitutionally recognized position. The CPI(M) has maintained its previous stance in this current situation.
On Friday, the Kerala High Court instructed that an FIR be registered under the Prevention of Corruption Act. Following this directive, the party announced its intention to contest the case on both legal and political grounds.
CPI(M) General Secretary M.A. Baby claimed that the case is politically motivated. He accused central agencies of targeting opposition leaders and questioned how the Congress-led government managed the Enforcement Directorate’s investigation report.
Baby’s remarks link the party’s current position to Karat’s 2009 statement. Back then, the argument was that Vijayan did not hold a government position, thus negating the need for his resignation. The present discourse focuses on whether this reasoning can still apply to a Leader of Opposition who occupies a cabinet-level official role.
The legal issue involves financial transactions between Cochin Minerals and Rutile Limited (CMRL) and Exalogic Solutions, a company associated with Vijayan’s daughter, T. Veena. However, these allegations have yet to be substantiated in court.
The High Court’s directive for an FIR marks the beginning of a criminal investigation and should not be interpreted as a declaration of guilt. Currently, the CPI(M) faces the challenge of defending its leaders in court while also clarifying the consistency of its political principles.
In this context, Karat’s 2009 statement has regained relevance. It remains uncertain whether the party will reconsider its earlier position regarding the ongoing situation.
Leave a Comment