-Dr. Abdul Ruff
Ailment as well as death of former Tamil Nadu CM Jayalalithaa is surrounded by a mystery maybe known only to Sasikala as people suspect of foul play in her unexpected end of life. Most party sympathizers and people at large do not trust the reports and the interviews given by the doctors on the issue.
TN CM Jayalalithaa was admitted to Apollo Hospital in Chennai on September 22. After 75 days of hospitalization, she died on December 5. Jayalalithaa’s medical condition improved a lot after her admission in the hospital but later her condition deteriorated dramatically, according to doctors treating her. Doctors were though mum why it happened and refused to answer why it was told that the late Tamil Nadu CM was improving just before her death. They also cleared that the press conference was not convened by the Apollo hospital; rather it was arranged by the Tamil Nadu government itself.
High drama was enacted both at Apollo hospital and assembly where the Sasikala proxy was to test the claimed majority on the floor. In both cases, Sasikala seems to have done home work and enacted too well. Apparently, Panneerselvam could not believe what was happening in the assembly and at the hotel where the ruling party MLAs were kept like bonded laborers by Sasikala and family known as “Mannargudi mafia” which effectively poisoned the mind of Jayalalithaa to loot state wealth. Sasikala has also looted the people’s wealth.
The high drama episode of Tamil Nadu CM Jayalalithaa’s Apollo treatment was indeed unusual as total secrecy was maintained with “pin drop silence” none was allowed entry into the room where Jayalalithaa was being treated- not even the chief minister Panneerselvam and Governor Rao of the state was out of bound. Who controlled the room? It was Sasikala, a former close friend of Jayalalithaa who singlehandedly staged entire episode with help of her relatives.
V K Sasikala Natarajan, who managed the post of the General Secretary of All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (AIADMK) was ready to take oath as the chief minister replacing former chief minister late Jayalalithaa’s trusted aide O Panneerselvam who took oath as the CM in the wee hours of December 5, 2016. Now Sasikala, who eyed the power at Madras Fort by taking over CM post after Jayalalithaa’s death, is in jail in Bangalore undergoing punishment for making and keeping disproportionate wealth by claiming to be a close ally of and operating under the authority of CM Jayalalithaa.
At the outset, Jayalalithaa was ailing for quite some time and she rarely appeared in public and hardly attended the office at Madras fort. Speculations were in the air that she is critically ill. However, similar situations had surfaced in the past as well.
It is the duty of the government to dispel all doubts over the death of a popular leader like Jayalalithaa without offering any kind of false justification in order to hide the details from the public domain.
Dispelling rumours surrounding Jayalalithaa’s death, Dr Richard Beale, the consultant intensivist from the London Bridge Hospital, said the former Tamil Nadu chief minister was critically ill and an acute sepsis led to her death. They also cleared that the press conference was not convened by the Apollo Hospital; rather it was arranged by the Tamil Nadu government itself.
None thinks everything was alright in the Apollo hospital where Sasikala and family controlled the treatment of Jayalalithaa. There are many PILs for investigating the mystery surrounding the treatment and death of former CM. The hospital is in a piquant situation as it concerned patient details, the court said, wondering whether such illnesses as headache and other medical conditions of the public servant too must be put in public domain. The bench of Chief Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Justice M Sundar was making the observations when a PIL of AIADMK cadre P A Joseph came up for further hearing. The PIL was admitted by a vacation bench last month with an observation as to why not the court-order exhumation of the body of Jayalalithaa. Joseph had sought appointment of three former judges of the Supreme Court to call for medical treatment details from Apollo Hospitals and conduct a probe. Court summarily rejected the demand for exhuming Jayalalithaa.
Clearly not amused with several public interest litigations being filed for a probe into the death of former Tamil Nadu chief minister J Jayalalithaa, the Madras high court on Monday asked as to what extent the medical treatment details of a person should be put in public domain, merely because she occupied a public office. The bench then raised three issues. First it sought to know whether the PIL petitioners, who included social activist K R ‘Traffic’ Ramaswamy and two AIADMK members, had any locus standi to raise the issue in court. Two, it sought to know whether there was any specific doubts regarding medical treatment given to Jayalalithaa. Three, it asked as to what amount of treatment details could be placed in public domain. The bench also observed that the absence of an immediate family member complicated the issue a bit. The bench then adjourned the case filed by Joseph to February 23 for further hearing and said the PIL of Gnanasekaran too would be listed to see if it raised any point not argued by the other PILs. Meanwhile, a division bench of the high court in Madurai referred a PIL seeking a CBI probe into Jayalalithaa’s death to the principal bench in Chennai saying similar PILs were being heard by the first bench. Last week, the Supreme Court declined to entertain a PIL of AIADMK MP Sasikala Pushpa saying she ought not to have approached the apex court directly.
PIL litigations being filed for a probe into the death of former Tamil Nadu chief minister J Jayalalithaa, the Madras high court asked as to what extent the medical treatment details of a person should be put in public domain, merely because she occupied a public office. During arguments, senior counsel K M Vijayan said people were worried about the secrecy surrounding Jayalalithaa’s death and that her leg was amputated during treatment prior to her death. Except medical bulletins by the hospital, the government had not released any details of Jayalalithaa’s health condition. Questioning what was the source of this information, the bench said everything was over and that now there was no need to feel worried. Senior advocate R Gandhi, who appeared on behalf another PIL petitioner, Ghanasekaran, said even the Governor was not allowed to visit Jayalalithaa when she was under treatment. Senior advocate P S Raman, representing the hospital, however, told the bench that a complete discharge summary of Jayalalithaa was ready with the hospital and that it was ready to place it in court. He also denied there was any mystery in the death of Jayalalithaa.
The official position is that public cannot know everything about the Jaya’s treatment, etc. And, not amused with several public interest. The bench then raised three issues. First it sought to know whether the PIL petitioners, who included social activist K R ‘Traffic’ Ramaswamy and two AIADMK members, had any locus standi to raise the issue in court.
Two, it sought to know whether there was any specific doubts regarding medical treatment given to Jayalalithaa. Three, it asked as to what amount of treatment details could be placed in public domain. The bench also observed that the absence of an immediate family member complicated the issue a bit. The bench then adjourned the case filed by Joseph to February 23 for further hearing and said the PIL of Gnanasekaran too would be listed to see if it raised any point not argued by the other PILs.
Meanwhile, a division bench of the high court in Madurai referred a PIL seeking a CBI probe into Jayalalithaa’s death to the principal bench in Chennai saying similar PILs were being heard by the first bench. Last week, the Supreme Court declined to entertain a PIL of AIADMK MP Sasikala Pushpa saying she ought not to have approached the apex court directly.
Blood relations are always there in dominating parties and politics as the ladders consider the right of their kin and kith for power cannot be challenged. . Let us wait and see the role of Sasikala’s family. If they interfere, people have the option of defeating the ruling party at any point. This is a democracy.
O Panneerselvam, the only choice of Jayalalithaa
Jayalalithaa never trusted any one just like that. She kicked Sasikala out of her Poes garden and she never spoke to her even on phone for nearly 2 years. But Sasikala, a shrewd business woman sued the hospital period to her advantage and emerged a strong person to dictate terms to a everyone.
O Panneerselvam remains the only person she trusted at least in some measure.
Jayalalithaa used to study each party member before assigning them a job or in cases of promotions. O Panneerselvam was somewhere 8th ranking minister in her cabinet when she decided to make him the acting CM before going to jail twice. She knew the elevation of Panneerselvam would not be relished by senior ministers and Sasikala who expected a chance to rule the state. Those ministers and MLAs who could not digest Panneerselvam’s promotion as acting CM have now joined the Sasikala camp to teach Pannerselvam a lesson. All of them now got a common goal of making Sasikala look larger than Jayalalithaa. Today they queue up in a Bangalore jail where Sasikala is ‘enjoying her new life, to get her blessings. Jail authorities are obliged to provide luxury treatment to their rich “step mother” Sasikala.
Clearly, there are many MLAs and ministers who felt disgraced when Jayalalithaa chose Panneerselvam to look after the state as the acting CM in her absence in jail and they have made alliance with Sasikala who also felt disappointed and disgraced by Jayalalithaa’s repeated appointment of OPS as acting CM ignoring her “close friend” Sasikala’s plea to keep the state under her control during her jail life, Jayalalithaa never gave Sasikala any government or party post. She never had full trust in Sasikala or any other person; Sasikala was an embarrassment for Jayalalithaa.
After O Panneerselvam resigned from the general secretary position of the AIADMK, Sasikala took over as per her secret plan to control, along wither relatives, both the ruling party and government. Maybe, first thinking that a woman as party chief could be better for the party and government, but he was mistaken as he failed to see through the hidden agenda of Sasikala. Under pressure from Sasikala Panneerselvam tendered his resignation from the chief minister’s post, according to the unanimous (which now appears to be not unanimous, but a huge majority) wishes of the legislature party of the AIADMK in the Assembly. The governor accepted his resignation and Panneerselvam was asked to continue as the care-taker chief minister of Tamil Nadu till a successor was appointed.
Former Tamil Nadu Chief Minister Pannerselvam, who lost his place in the party and government after Jayalalithaa’s death, was obviously not sure how Sasikala would treat him, but he continued to support Sasikala’s efforts to become the party supremo, revolted only when Sasikala totally sidelined him and refused to make a cabinet member. He was never invited to meetings with MLAs and party functionaries. He was not even informed about the meetings.
After quitting the post, O Panneerselvam who was denied permission to see Jayalalithaa in her “death bed” in the Apollo hospital has been demanding a judicial investigation into the death of Jayalalithaa and the MPs who support him met the president of India Mukherjee and asked him to order investigation and bring out the truth about Jayalalithaa’s real end of life. O Panneerselvam has announced a fast on March 08, the women’s day.
Sasikala played her card well as she wooed some ministers in Panneerselvam cabinet and MLAs and party functionaries of AIADMK to ‘demand’ Sasikala to replace OPS and be the new chief minister and a stupendous majority of MLAs of the AIADMK elected her as the leader of the legislature party. None of this was illegal. At this point, Panneerselvam rebelled against the AIADMK party leadership and claimed that actually most AIADMK MLAs were secretly supportive of him. He also claimed that Sasikala and her associates were holding AIADMK MLAs in certain locations against their wishes.
This was a charge of kidnapping. If it was true, then Panneerselvam was fully within his right to send in police to these locations and rescue the so-called ‘kidnapped’ MLAs. He did no such thing, did not order investigation into the Jayalalithaa’s death, but continued to parrot the kidnapping theory. A couple of MLAs escaped from the hotel and joined the OPS team. His bluff was called when even after Sasikala’s arrest, the AIADMK legislature party, ostensibly freed from the clutches of Sasikala, did not chose Panneerselvam but rallied behind Palanisamy, the successor chosen by Sasikala. In the trust vote, 122 MLAs voted for the AIADMK government led by Palanisamy. The Panneerselvam camp could garner 11 votes. Sasikala and Palanisamy showed he commanded absolute majority in the Assembly and a stupendous majority among AIADMK MLAs. Through all of these events, what has been most troubling is the undemocratic behavior of the governor of the state.
Sasikala achieve major victories as she could become the General secretary of the party by shot cut route, removed Panneerselvam from the post of CM, occupied Poes garden bungalow of Jayalalithaa, her cars and her money and other wealth, put her own proxy as TN CM. The party is controlled by her relatives now. Only thing she could not is CM chair. But in jail also she has managed special privileges that are denied to criminals and national frauds like her. She is eager to enjoy all privileges Jayalalithaa had enjoyed in jail.
Sasikala cannot vote or contest in polls for next 10 years. That means she cannot contest the party elections too. How can a fraud she be the general secretary of AIADMK founded by MGR?
That is not surprising. Panneerselvam, in his brief regime, bartered away Tamil Nadu’s state rights when it agreed to the UDAY scheme, something that J Jayalalithaa had opposed on grounds of encroachment on federal structure. Thus, the Centre might have found a pliant partner in Panneerselvam. Their horse did not win the race, even though the Centre tried its best through its man in Chennai.
Governor is the constitutional head of the state where he or she performs the constitutional duties and he rules the state with the help of a duly formed government with the CM calling all shots.
The governor is a representative eof federal government and not elected by the people of Tamil Nadu. He doesn’t represent their political choice. The MLAs of Tamil Nadu are elected by the people. They represent their political choice. Thus, when a governor denies the chance to form the government to the person elected by a majority of MLAs of Tamil Nadu as their leader, an unelected person denies the people their right to exercise their political choice through their elected representatives.
Tamil Nadu Governor C Vidyasagar Rao simply overruled the majority opinion of the people of Tamil Nadu mainly because he could. It is immaterial whether he was right or wrong in appointing Sasikala’s proxy as CM by ignoring the Sasikala’s arrest and put up in jail in Bangalore. The relevant legal and constitutional question is, is that his job?
The governor of TN Rao played a crucial role in the recent political turmoil in the state. The first part of political turmoil in Tamil Nadu seems to have finally subsided, albeit temporarily. For now, Chief Minister E Palanisamy, of the AIADMK, seems to be in charge of affairs, though it could well be a lull before another storm. After Palanisamy won the trust vote in the Tamil Nadu Assembly, the opposition DMK petitioned the Madras High Court to cancel the vote. The high court adjourned the hearing of the petition till the week starting 27 February. In case the trust vote is cancelled, the focus will again shift to the behavior of the governor of Tamil Nadu vis-à-vis asking for a new trust vote and government continuation or formation.
Who is the governor to ignore the majority viewpoint in a representative government? The governor is not sovereign. Not even the President of the Indian Union is sovereign. Only the people are. That’s what makes the Indian Union a republic and not a monarchy.
Who is the governor of a state? This character is New Delhi’s agent in a state/province. This character even has discretionary powers – which do not flow from the wishes of the state’s people but typically from the wishes of the Centre.
What is the origin of this position? When British acquired one sovereign area of the subcontinent after another, after having amassed some serious amount of territory like Sasikala has done in Tamil Nadu, they appointed some loyal and trusted centralized imperial rule, to keep the acquired areas and provinces ‘in check’. These positions had various names in various British acquired and controlled territories in the subcontinent. The 1935 Government of India Act had provincial governors with huge discretionary powers – natural for a colonial Centre when dealing with limited but representative native provincial government.
The office of the governor is an example of an anti-people undemocratic relic from the British rule. Must we remind ourselves that what happened on 15 August, 1947 was a transfer of power, its repackaging as ‘independence’ notwithstanding? People of a state, Tamil Nadu included, are neither stupid nor apprentice-citizens. They are adults with inalienable rights of democratic representation. Swaraj is a process, not an event. Abolishing the post of the governor will be a step in that direction. It is not so much a ‘bad apple’ problem but a poison tree issue. Why should unelected governors exist at all?
So let’s take advantage of this relatively placid, if albeit transient, scenario and look back at what happened around the issue of chief ministership of Tamil Nadu and the role played by the Governor C Vidyasagar Rao in the turmoil. With a guilty verdict against VK Sasikala in the disproportionate assets case, the governor’s stand in not inviting Sasikala to form the government or prove her majority has been hailed in certain quarters as evidence of his farsightedness. The governor might have been farsighted because he set his sight on things that are far from his brief. And that is a huge problem in a federal democracy like the Indian Union.
A state without a representative government is essentially an autocracy. From where did Rao get the power to deny the people a government? He chose to stay away from Tamil Nadu for days altogether when there was essentially a dangerous power and governance vacuum in Tamil Nadu and power struggle was peaking up. Essentially, the governor chose to deny people their chosen government until the court judgment came in.
It appears that Rao essentially chose to suspend democracy in Tamil Nadu for quite a few days and continued with an unrepresentative and hence undemocratic regime instead. After Panneerselvam’s resignation, Rao was handed the signed list of MLAs supporting Sasikala as Chief Minister. This list constituted a majority of MLAs in the Assembly. But Sasikala’s active involvement in the disproportionate case is clear and she would go back to jail. .
Sasikala is guilty as that was decided by the higher courts. The governor is not the court. It is not his job to decide or predict whether in 10 days or 10 weeks or 10 months, someone might get convicted. There is no article in the Constitution that says that a government or a chief minister has to have some minimum tenure or that if someone has a possibility of conviction in a future date, then that person cannot be appointed as the chief minister but he waited to provide a stable government. A lot of criticism appeared against Governor’s decision to deny a representative government to the people of Tamil Nadu quickly by just ascertaining if Sasikala had commanded a majority in the Assembly. He was presented with a list of MLAs representing the majority of the Assembly. He should verify the list for facts; he could have asked for a parade of MLAs. Sasikala wanting to be the CM quickly before the Supreme Court pronounces judgment of punishment for her crimes so that she could demand VVIP treatment in jail. Palanisamy’s trust vote shows that Sasikala’s list of MLAs was not entirely fraudulent though she managed the show undemocratically without much flaws.
Does the governor of a state, not under President’s Rule, have any right to deny the person chosen by a majority of MLAs to form the government, when no article of the Constitution disqualifies that person? That is the real question that Rao needs to answer.
Who does the governor represent? Time and again, it is seen that the governor represents the Union government. Thus, the governors selectively toppling only those state governments that are ruled by parties not in power at the Centre.The most recent instance of this shameless act happened recently in Arunachal Pradesh. Even more recently, the governor of Tripura refused to read passages critical of the Union government – a House speech that is prepared by Tripura’s Council of Ministers and thus represents the majority viewpoint of the people of Tripura.
There is reason to believe that the charges of partisanship against the governor of Tamil Nadu are not without substance. Rao, a veteran, like PM Modi, of BJP-Jansangh for more than 40 years, gave ample opportunity to anti-AIADMK forces in Tamil Nadu to try to break the party. The BJP party has fished the most in the troubled demonetization waters.
The DMK and DK are very particular is that self-respect should not be short-changed at any cost. Prostrating before anyone should be stopped.
Caste politics continues to dominate many decisions of the government in Tamil Nadu. The Brahminical press wanted to see that the AIADMK’s leadership did not get away from the Brahmin hold. This ploy has been defeated by the AIADMK general council and executive council by selecting Sasikala whose association with the leadership of the party is more than 30 years old. There simply was no alternative suggested for Sasikala. For the AIADMK, she was the Hobson’s choice. Her speech proved she could deliver. But there are many criticisms of Sasikala’s family. People talk about Sasikala’s family members standing around Jayalalithaa’s body. Even for rationalists, when someone dies, so many people and family members come and cry. They cannot be asked to go away.
Most Tamils are under privileged and they seek reservations. No state other than Tamil Nadu enjoys the 9th schedule protection of 69% reservation. An exclusive legislation was passed by Jayalalithaa, unlike in other states, though she was a Brahmin. Narasimha Rao, another Brahmin, was the PM in whose time Parliament passed it. President Shankar Dayal Sharma who gave the assent was also a Brahmin. All this because public opinion was strong! There is a new leadership in the Dravidian parties. Should the movement be any different in the future, should it evolve?
Deepa condemns Sasikala’s tactics
Deepa Jayakumar said she has decided to enter politics to fulfill her aunt’s dreams.”I can’t see anyone in the place of Jayalalithaa. It was after talking to AIADMK cadre that I decided to enter politics,” Deepa said at a press conference at her home in T Nagar here. “There are two options — one to join the AIADMK and the other, to launch a new party. I will take a call on it after talking to my supporters,” she said. Asked whether she was scared of AIADMK general secretary V K Sasikala, Deepa said, “I’m not scared of anybody, it is not my nature.” She avoided questions in connection with Sasikala. “I don’t want to make any personal comment now. Cadre’s and people’s decision is final,” she said. Asked about her lack of experience in politics, Deepa said taking care of the welfare of the people is important, and not experience. “I will follow the footsteps of MGR and Jayalalithaa and I will work for the welfare of people. A number of schemes that Amma implemented should be reached to the right people. I will work for it,” she said. Deepa’s house in T Nagar witnessed huge crowd of supporters who were shouting slogans supporting the young leader. “There are two options — one to join the AIADMK and the other, to launch a new party. I will take a call on it after talking to my supporters,” she said. Deepa said she would announce her decision on her aunt’s birth anniversary, on February 24.
J Jayalalithaa’s niece Deepa on Friday the Feb 24, 2017 kick-started her political career by launching the ‘MGR Amma Deepa Forum’, on the late Chief Minister’s birth anniversary. Addressing a press conference at her home, she unveiled a flag carrying the images of Jayalalithaa and M G Ramachandran and said her political journey has “begun”. Responding to a query, Deepa said people wanted that she should contest from R K Nagar constituency that fell vacant following the demise of J Jayalalithaa. “I will definitely contest. Though I was not keen on entering politics, it is the people’s wish,” she said. She said the Forum has been formed to “retrieve the two leaves (AIADMK’s official symbol) and bring back Amma’s golden rule in Tamil Nadu”. The former chief minister’s niece said she was getting several requests to enter politics and she did so to respect people’s wishes. Deepa, who will be the treasurer of the Forum, said her next course of action would be decided in due course and she would reveal it at the “appropriate time”.
Deepa recalled that she used to visit Jayalalithaa every year on her birthday to seek her blessings. Earlier in the day, she visited Jayalalithaa’s memorial at Kamarajar Salai and laid a wreath at the burial site. Asserting that the forum would work towards the welfare of the people, she said it would follow the work left by Amma as Chief Minister and ‘Puratchi Thalaivar’ (M G Ramachandran) by pursuing their welfare programmes. On her brother Deepak’s remarks regarding his willingness to pay Rs 100 crore fine for the Poes Garden residence, which he claimed has been bequeathed to him and Deepa, she said, “I am not aware of what he stated.” Deepa further said she suspected that his remarks were “politically motivated”.
“He has changed the stand,” she said apparently referring to Deepak’s earlier support to AIADMK chief V S Sasikala who is now serving a jail term in Bengaluru in a graft case. On whether it was appropriate for her to join politics after Jayalalithaa’s death as she had not taken part in politics, Deepa retorted that even Sasikala had no political experience. “Sasikala plunged into politics to control the property , party and government of Jayalalithaa, to promote her family,” she said.
If Sasikala becomes Tamil Nadu CM, it will be similar to military takeover: Jayalalithaa’s niece Deepa
In what is seen as a visible power shift at the top of Tamil Nadu government, speculations about VS Sasikala becoming the new chief minister of the state is making the headlines lately. However, late J. Jayalalithaa’s niece Deepa Jayakumar seems unhappy with the notion. In her latest interaction with India Today TV channel, she said that she is totally against it and neither people of Tamil Nadu are going to accept this. “I would never imagine of something bad as this happen to the people of Tamil Nadu,” she said comparing it to be as similar as a ‘military take-over’ and not a democratic decision at all. Deepa, last month made an official announcement of entering into politics on the centenary birth anniversary of AIADMK founder MG Ramachandran. She had also said, “I will make my next announcement on Jayalalithaa’s birthday.” Talking to media, she said that all plans will depend on her supporters. She had also said that a lot of changes have happened in Tamil Nadu politics over the recent past. She also claimed that people, especially young people demanded that she should enter politics. “I wish to protect the belief that people have placed on me,” Deepa added
But it seems AIADMK members, who are sued to feel the “saree touch”, fall at Sasikala’s feet also to show their loyalty It’s psychological. If there are four or five people, and the first person prostrates before the leader, all the others who want something from the leader would prostrate. That is not out of respect or admiration. None wants to be seen as rebel who willingly deviated from the usual prostration.
Most ministers who visited Sasikala in jail reportedly just fell to the feet of the corrupt Sasikala who enjoys that “respect” of Tamils. Is it fair?
There is a Tamil saying, ‘The one who falls at your feet would also trip your feet.’ You have to be careful.. ..
Observations: Should criminals and frauds enjoy special privileges in jails as well?
Government of India needs to ensure that a proper investigation is made into the treatment cum death of former popular CM Jayalalithaa and the reports be made available to the public. Guilty should be punished. India cannot afford to celebrate the corrupt cum criminal leaders who loot the nation’s resources.
That the new proxy government of Sasikala under Palanisamy is not Jayalalithaa’s government as the ruling AIADMK party claims. The new government has not made any difference to the misrule in the state. In fact, the new government is as bad as the position during the final days of Jayalalithaa.
Panneerselvam should have raised the issue when Jayalalithaa died or even before that when he was denied permission to enter the room to see Jayalalithaa. However, he did not do so because he part of the government and ruling party.
Assembly democracy has been challenged by the ruling AIADMK and DMK. In fact the ruling AIADMK had come to the Madras Fort with a hidden agenda which could be understood when police in large members were placed inside the assembly in while uniform.
Panneerselvam had claimed he had the majority as most MLAs were with him but during the assembly floor test, most MLAs voted for the Sasikala These MLAs want to rule and enjoy the privileges as MLAs, ministers, other important posts of government agencies, like chairman, president etc. Moreover, Sasikala may have offered come crores from the party funds.
Since public is really confused and their doubts about the mystery in Jayalalithaa’s are firmly footed, it is absolutely necessary for the government to order a judicial investigation and reveal the whole truth about the cause of death. Also, it is apparent that Jayalalithaa died much before 11.30 pm as the Apollo hospital would like the public to believe. The investigation would also reveal the actual time and date of her death.
Sasikala, at that point, was not barred from holding office. Under which law or article of the Constitution did Rao not invite the person who had the support of the majority in the Assembly to form the government? A majority of MLAs of Tamil Nadu represents the majority viewpoint of the people of the state in a representative democracy.
It is quite likely that there was nothing untoward happened and Jayalalithaa died a natural death after prolonged illness despite the best efforts of the best doctors available as Sasikala and the hospital claim. However, high level secrecy maintained for so many days indicates it was not so and that amounts to conspiracy against the TN CM and her most trusted minister in her cabinet Panneerselvam.
The fluctuating news about Jayalalithaa’s health conditions obviously gives rise to confusion and suspicion in the mind of people
As Sasikala was ready to take power from Panneerselvam when the doctors from UK came to Chennai and made some remarks about the status of Jayalalithaa’s health. But Supreme Court played a vital role in denying her the pleasure of becoming CM of Tamil state.
Sasikala is not happy about investigation demand, maybe because the outcomes would go against her.
Finally an opinion to court authorities in India: jail authorities make money like Sasikala has done by servicing the prisoners and criminal convicts. Sasikala has been given some privileges in the jail by overlooking the crime committed by her for which India’s top court punished her and she is a top convict who does not deserve any special considerations like special room as CM Jayalalithaa enjoyed like mobile, AC, TV, money, freedom to keep meeting people at will. She is not a big leader fighting for the nation with any history of party or national work. She has only looted the resources belonging to people. By providing all luxurious life to her in jail, the jail authorities are in fact insulting the Hon Supreme Court.
If the jail authorities still insist on proving all luxury to her, then, every criminal and fraud would also be extend these privileges as every convict equal before law.