Bahubalis of Bihar
Men, Matters & Memories

By M L Kotru

My heart bleeds for the poor chap. Bahubali Pappu Yadav, running from one court to another, from one police station to the other. Asking an assortment of courts and SHOs to arrest him. No, don't get him wrong. He is not, for a change, daring the courts or the police. He is very serious when it comes to respecting the legal process, he says. Never mind allegations that he has committed all sorts of crimes and that he is no greenhorn when it comes to confronting law.

Why, then, is my heart bleeding for him ? For the simple reason that no one takes him seriously when he presents himself before a judge or a police official. It so happens that last week the Supreme Court revoked his bail and ordered him to be arrested. Just about the time when he had offered to contest one of the two Lok Sabha seats vacated by Laloo Prasad Yadav, the Rashtriya Janata Dal ''Bahu-bahubali''. Laloo, in fact, asked him to contest on his party's ticket which he gratefully accepted. His wife, a legislator from Laloo-baiting Ram Vilas Paswan's party has since chosen to defy her own party and to canvass for her husband. Nothing wrong with a ''pativrata stree'' standing by her man.

But why aren't the police or the courts obeying the Supreme Court order seeking Pappu's surrender. The obvious reason, and a predictable one at that, is that given the state of communications in Bihar, no one has informed the police or the courts of the apex court's order.

Forget the IT revolution, the global village. In Laloo's Bihar it obviously is not possible for the State Government to inform the district courts and the police about the apex court's order. It could be argued by Rabri Devi or Pappu or even by the Union Railway Minister Laloo Yadav that it's not for them to go round the entire State to inform everyone about the Supreme Court order. They would probably have preferred that the Supreme Court itself appointed a thousand bailiffs, each one armed with a copy of its order, to go round Bihar informing all that Yadav's bail was cancelled by the court and that he must surrender.

Poor Pappu Yadav, how would anyone blame him for not surrendering when Laloo Prasad Yadav and Rabri Devi, the de jure Chief Minister of Bihar, are the one's prompting him to avoid surrender. By the item you read this Pappu, it is likely, may have surrendered. And also campaigned during the intervening period as only Bahubalis of Bihar can.

To go by Rabri Devi's logic it is obviously not the job of the State Government to convey the Supreme Court orders to is officials. And she should know, for, as another ''pativrata stree'' she must do only what her husband, the de facto Chief Minister of Bihar, tells her. And Laloo is not at the moment concerned about just court orders. He has to prove his might. He has been doing it with undiminished ardour-yes, even after the self-same Supreme Court, just a day or so after its verdict in Pappu's case, asked both Laloo and Rabri to show cause why their bail in the multi-crore fodder scam must not be cancelled, given their known propensity to interfere with the course of justice.

You can't blame Laloo if he has come to believe that the fodder scam was well and truly forgotten. He had, for his part, ensured that it was. And given his clout in the UPA Government, of which he is a major cog, the move over to Delhi from Patna only seemed to help in buying the fodder scam for good, like all other cases involving high profile politicians.

Also going for Laloo is the harsh reality that the Congress Party which heads the UPA Government in Delhi is his junior partner in Bihar. So junior indeed is the Congress Party there that it may put up only taken resistance when elections to be State Assembly are held. It has even been suggested that Congress should not contest against Laloo in Bihar at all and instead should seek his support in the Jharkhand polls. Laloo is confident that the Congress led UPA Government cannot afford to lose his support at the Centre; he is needed both in Jharkhand and Bihar.

Yes the Supreme Court notice against the backdrop must be seen as a set-back for the bully-from Bihar. Typically, he looks unfazed but there is little else he can do. Bluff, bluster and amazing powers of manipulation have seen his phenomenal rise going up the political ladder in Bihar, unhindered by people with more distinguished political pedigrees. Along the way he has fathered a new political class, the bahubalis whose speciality lies is wielding the lathi, as Laloo himself does. Under his umbrella has grown a new class of politicians who specalise in using brutal force to have their writ run. You couldn't have missed last weeks clip on your TV showing Laloo Yadav, armed with a lathi, enacting the real life Laloo briefly, for a film appropriately named ''Padmashri Laloo Prasad Yadav''.

Laloo's bravado apart, the documentary evidence submitted to the court of the hold the Railway Minister has to tried to leverage his position in New Delhi to his advantage is conclusive. This has been done by effecting sudden, motivated transfers of key official engaged in the cases against him and Rabri Devi, which makes a mockery of the UPA Government's credibility.

And Laloo is the man who appeared on the political horizon as a messiah of the backward and unprivileged. It doesn't speak highly of our polity that despite the piling of the evidence of corruption and abdication, Laloo seems to retain the halo which initially came to surround his name.

It may be good therefore that, when our politicians have ceased to live by the rule-book, the Supreme Court has reminded that even Laloo Prasad that even he cannot be above the law. Meanwhile, he must continue to be seen as a tainted Minister. I am aware though that to bring Laloo to book my take at least two life times. I am reminded of a confidence shared with me by one of the top CBI men associated with the investigation some six years back. ''Y'see there are thousands upon thousands of documents to be scrutinised, checked out, verified before you can produce these before a court of law. From where, for instance, are you to produce receipts and registration numbers of three-wheelers in which buffaloes or fodder has been moved?''. An old question arises again. How do you carry buffaloes in three-wheelers. Heard that one, before !

Row over Musharraf's uniform

By Samuel Baid

About four years ago Gen Pervez Musharraf was hailed in Pakistan as the saviour of the nation when he overthrew the elected Government of Mr Nawaz Sharif in a military coup. There was great jubilation. Among the political leaders who congratulated Musharraf was none other than the Chairperson of the Pakistan People's Party (PPP) Benazir Bhutto who chose self-exile in the face of corruption charges slapped on her and her husband by the Sharif Government.

When Musharraf took over he did not promise restoration of democracy-unlike his successor Gen Ziaul Haq who promised elections in 90 days but held them eight years later and that too on a non-party basis. Until his death in an air crash on August 17, 1988, he held the dual position of Army chief and civilian President. But he was clever enough not to wear his military uniform for civilian functions after the 1985 party-less elections. He wore on achkan because he knew the people reacted to his uniform. He tried his best to look like a civilian President. ''I am like Giani Zail Singh,'' he said to claim that he was only figurehead. People knew Zia as an artful hypocrite, but the clamour against his uniform was not so loud as is the case of Musharraf's uniform today.

Zia had the gift of the gab- a gift he used to disarm his bitter critics. His choice of words and expressions was terrific when he spoke in Urdu. He sirred deposed Prime Minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto although he had made up his mind to hang him. He made it a point never to sound offensive and arrogant. On the other hand, Musharraf sounds arrogant and vengeful. A very obvious reason is his deficiency in Urdu and more so in the English language. Thus he can easily offend even his friends without intending to do so. He makes it a point to appear on TV in military uniform knowing fully well that it offends the people. As a result, it is not only his person that is under constant attacks in the Press and public debates but also the Army, which for long had been treated as a holy cow. Zia used to call it Allah's Army as a reply to the critics of this organisation. Of course, there was a lot of criticism of the Army during his rule because of the Generals' involvement in drug and gun-running and the exploitation of the name of Islam. But today this Army is being projected in the Press as a corrupt force, which is the main cause of Pakistan's problems.

Since its creation in 1947, Pakistan has never seen a smooth, peaceful transfer of power. In the early years civilian governments were dismissed by Governor-Generals. In October 1958 began the era of Generals' direct or indirect rule. Gen Ayub ruled as the Field Marshal cum civilian President from 1958 to 1969 when he had to step down in fear of his Army Chief Yahya Khan. He died in 1947 as Mr Nobody. Gen Yahya Khan met worse fate after the 1971 military defeat and break-up of the country. He was forced to surrender power to Mr Zulfikar Ali Bhutto in December that year. Bhutto, too, was thrown out and subsequently hanged by his favourite Army Chief Zia in 1977. Zia clung to power until his death in an air crash in August 1988. Between 1988 and October 1999 Ms Benazir Bhutto and Mr Nawaz Sharif twice ascended the seat of Prime Minister and twice they were thrown out by an Army Chief President-clique.

General Musharraf left nobody in doubt about his long-term plans when he announced on the completion of one year in power that Ms Bhutto and Mr Nawaz Sharif would not be allowed to return to power and that future Parliament would not be allowed to digress from the economic roadmap he had drawn. In June 2001 he unceremoniously snatched the post of President from Mr Rafiq Tarar and on April 30, 2002 he organised a referendum to become an ''elected'' President. In October that year he held the general elections keeping main political leaders out of them. Muslim League turncoats formed what was called the King's Party to become the appendage of the Army rule. As a result of these elections, Mr Zafarullah Khan Jamali was appointed as the Prime Minister but Gen Musharraf continued to be the virtual Chief Executive. He became so confident about himself that on April 24, 2003, he announced to a meeting of editors in Islamabad that he would not take off his military uniform. ''I'll keep it on. I know the posts of the Army Chief and President should not be held by one person. But leave it to me. In the interest of the country idealism is compromised.'' He addressed the editors in military uniform.

He outwitted the six-party alliance of Islamic parties called Muttahada Majlis-e-Amal (MMA) by agreeing to drop his uniform by December 31, 2004 if it supported a bill making his Legal Framework Order (LFO) a part of the 1973 Constitution. Musharraf told the nation on national media on December 24, 2003 ''I have decided to give up the post of the Army Chief by December 31, 2004''. Subsequently, the LFO bill was passed with MMA's support and Parliament voted for Musharraf's presidentship. Now he began dropping hints that he was not serious about giving up his military uniform. The deserters of the PPP, who called themselves PPP (Patriots) went public appealing to Musharraf not to take off his uniform. That this appeal was well-planned by the establishment became clear when less than a week later Musharraf told BBC that he had not yet decided to give up the Army's post. As for his agreement with the MMA he said ''I am cheesed off with the MMA''. It did not vote for his Presidentship not supported the National Security Council bill, he said as if to declare he was no more bound by his agreement with this Alliance.

Simultaneously, he stepped up operations in South Waziristan against suspected Al Qaeda and Taliban warriors hiding there. Through these operations, his critics say, he was trying to emphasise his importance to the United States in its war on global terrorism. During his recent visit to New York he reportedly told President George Bush about the sacrifices his jawans were making in Waziristan to hunt out Al Qaeda top leaders. In other words, he would like the USA and the West to keep supporting him irrespective of the state of democracy in Pakistan. When he went to New York he found the American Press critical of his intention to back out from his promise to give up his military uniform.

Just the day (September 22) when Musharraf was going to address the UN General Assembly, the Sindh Assembly passed a resolution in the absence of the opposition appealing to Musharraf to keep his military uniform on in the larger interest of the country. Earlier, the Punjab Assembly had passed a similar resolution while the North-West Frontier Assembly reminded Musharraf about his promise to give up the military uniform. In the Baluchistan Assembly a resolution in support of Musharraf's uniform was moved but quickly withdrawn.

Gen Musharraf and his civilian proteges have given their own reasons why he must continue with his uniform. Musharraf claimed the people of Pakistan were upset when he announced his promise to give up the post of the Army Chief. Later he claimed in a TV interview that 96 per cent population wanted him to continue as the Army Chief. It sounded like a big joke because despite all the rigging, the opposition said, the turnout was about ten per cent for his referendum in April 2002. The records of the referendum were destroyed by the Election Commission a few months later so that they were not challenged in a court of law. Again, despite brazen rigging in favour of those candidates who today cling to Musharraf's uniform, the PPP got the highest vote percentage in the October 2002 election, according to the Election Commission's report. So, who are the 96 per cent people ?

Information Minister Sheikh Rashid, who goes about as the Government's spokesman, says because of the Waziristan operations Musharraf has to continue as the Army Chief. Newly handpicked Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz says he must continue in his uniform in the interest of economic developments.

The Government claims the Constitution has a provision for one man holding the posts of the Army Chief and the President. It will like the Opposition to go to the Supreme Court to seek its opinion. But the opposition has no faith in the country's judiciary. Instead, it plans to start agitations.

Pakistan is certainly in for a political chaos if Musharraf breaks his promise about his uniform this December-end.