Shri Abhishek Singhvi addressed the media today.
Shri Abhishek Singhvi said that as an example of hypocrisy and political opportunism, this must take the cake. The BJP and the Shiv Sena have been together from before 1995. They have been in Government from 1995 till 1999 and since then they continued to be coalition partners i.e. over 15-17 years. The Shiv Sena has over the course of almost these two decades used repeatedly filthy, derogatory, demeaning and disgusting language in respect of migrants several times. Not once have been found any unequivocal, unambiguous negation and declaration to the contrary by either BJP or its remote controller the RSS. The Congress has been the party which has at the risk of a lot of reaction spoken up time and again in the interests of national unity and integration. In fact, the sympathy of BJP with the philosophy of Shiv Sena goes back to the mid 1960s when, as the whole country knows, similar derogatory language was used against those from Southern States. In the 1970s violence was threatened if those migrants to Mumbai did not leave. As recently as 6th March 2008, the Shiv Sena categorically, in writing, talked of Ek Bihari- Sau Bimari and what were the BJP and the RSS doing. Is this not the peak of the hypocrisy and opportunism that in need they were cohabiting with JD (U) in Bihar, at the same time cohabiting with the Shiv Sena in Mumbai. How many times did they wake up or give a clear unequivocal call. They fought elections together. They enjoyed the loaves and fishes of power. They tried to snatch power more than once by being in elections together. They wrote manifestos in which they never affirmatively decry and denied their stand. In deed, the BJP and the RSS in the context of their current somersault and volte-face themselves preached religious exclusiveness along with geographical exclusiveness. They talked of rule by a certain majority contrary to the constitutional schemes and contrary to our ethos of our secularism. Here are the parties which ran with the hare and hunted with the hound and now you have multi-speak. You have their multi speak with different nuances and similarly different tones and tenors by the BJP, RSS and the Shiv Sena. All this is intended to create confusion. All is intended to fool the people. All this is intended to mislead the public to make them forget their established recorded conduct over 15-17 years. What is the use of now emulating and imitating the Congress Party Yes, the imitation is the best form of flattery and we are flattered. But you cannot fool the public in this manner. In the interest of accountability, at the minimum you must first of all declare unequivocally and once for all clear the stand on this issue on which you have practiced deliberately for close to 20 years. Second you must denounce the Shiv Sena, or if you like the JD (U), or if you like both. Third, you must break up any alliance which you are in and have been continuing. Again whether the alliance in Maharashtra or the alliance in Bihar, or both, because this kind of hypocrisy is an insult to the intelligence of the people of India.
To a question whether the alliance partner NCP is insulting the Congress every day with reference to the statement of Shri Sangma, Shri Singhvi said that the issue of Prime Minister, Lok Sabha, elected Prime Minister, these are such old issues which have been raised more than several times and have been rejected by resounding electoral verdicts and that they do not deserve to be dignified by any answer. They have been rejected by resounding verdicts not once but many times over at central elections as well as state elections and we do not think there is any need to dignify them with any answer.
On the question of the reaction of the Congress party on the statement of Shiv Sena making a strong pitch that Mumbai and Maharashtra is only for Marathis, Shri Singhvi said that his whole briefing today is about asking those parties who are misleading the media to define their stand. The stand of the Congress party is clear for the last 20-30 years. We denounce unequivocally any such artificial imagined divisions. We believe that parties, who are today in fact giving us the compliment of imitation and trying to emulate our statements, it is they who are not serious even today. They are practicing hypocrisy and double speak and we have therefore, through you, called for their unequivocal declaration. But more than that, before that for their complete surrendering of their relations with their coalition partners who practice such statements.
On the question whether the NCP had joined hands with the BJP, Shri Singhvi said that it is really for you to ask both NCP and BJP and not or me to answer. But you are right to the extent that it was a plank; a specific plank in electoral campaigns principally of the opposition along with other parties was resoundingly rejected not once but many times. There is no need to preach to any party. There is no need for a message when you are partners in no less than a central coalition and in no less than a state coalition. No preaching is required. You have to strengthen each other's hands and you have to proceed positively and we do not have any doubt that every reasonable person realizes that.
On the question of having more than one Chief Ministers in Meghlaya, Shri Sinvhi said under the constitution, there is and can be only one Chief Minister. There is no question of two or three Chief Ministers. There is one Chief Minister. However, as you know in several States, there are persons who may not be in the Council of Ministers but may be heading the Corporations or Commissions who are frequently given the status of the Cabinet Ministers. That does not mean that they have the powers to exercise and take decision which the Chief Minister does. Similarly, a person credited with the rank of Dy. Chief Minister or indeed a Chief Minister does not have the jurisdiction to take decision as if he was the Chief Minister. Shri Singhvi further added that he agrees with the media that it is relatively unusual as far the rank of the Chief Minister is concerned but the essence of the issue is that the Chief Minister remains the same and only he can exercise the powers entrusted to a person to head the Council of Ministers. That does not make the second, third or fourth Chief Minister. This is the political decision taken with full transparency and the Government of the day takes the responsibility to deal with it should there be a political price and cost to it. But it is conscious decision and is not taken in hurry.
On the question whether it is a coincidence that the President of the BSP has resigned today when Shri Rahul Gandhi is touring Uttar Pradesh, Shri Singhvi said that Shri Rahul Gandhi does only positive politics. His visits to Uttar Pradesh are to strengthen the NSUI and the Youth Congress of the State who are considered to be the backbone of the party. The other parties should keep their house in order and the resignation of the State President of BSP does not have any co-relation with the visit of Shri Rahul Gandhi.
Tom Vadakkan
Secretary, AICC