Press Briefing Monday, 24 June 2009

Shri Manish Tewari addressed the media today.


Shri Manish Tewari said that the statement made by the CP(M) General Secretary Prakash Karat in which he said that nothing would be achieved by declaring the CPI(Maoist) as a terrorist organization was an unfortunate one and the Congress party condemns it. Perhaps he was not aware of the fact that the earlier versions of the CPI(Maoist) namely CPI (Marxist-Leninist), People’s War Group and Maoist-Communist centre were already on the Prevention of Unlawful Activities Act’s terror group schedule. And as a natural consequence, when these organizations merged to form a new group i.e. the CPI (Maoist), that too needed to be included in the above schedule. He said that whenever there has been an issue of national interest, whether it was the 1962 Indo-China war or the Indo-US Nuclear Deal, the Leftists have always been found wanting.

Shri Manish Tewari said that today they were a number of CP(M)s whether it was Viajayan’s CP(M) or Achyutanandan’s CP(M) or Biman Bose’s CP(M) or even Prakash Karat’s CP(M) reflective of the clear divisions in the party. He said that at least on the issues of national interest, the Leftists and especially the CP(M) must speak in one voice. He said that the caveat added by the West Bengal CM of implementing the ban imposed on the CPI(Maoist) by the central government as per its own assessments was reflective of its double speak. On one hand the state government asks for central assistance to deal with Maoist violence but on the other hand it hesitates on taking the necessary steps like declaring the CPI(Maoist) as an unlawful organization under the Criminal Law Amendment Act 1908.

Shri Manish Tewari said that the statement made by the West Bengal CM raises a huge constitutional dilemma. He said that if state governments take a stance that they would implement central laws in a selective manner or in a manner they desire, then it would create constitutional chaos. So one advises the West Bengal CM to speak with a little more responsibility on such grave and serious matters.

To a question on Sarabjit, Shri Manish Tewari said that as far as the Sarabjit case was concerned, Pakistani courts have found him guilty in four cases and he was sentenced to death in all of them. His review petition in one of these cases was rejected way back in 2007. As far as the remaining three review petitions are concerned, it was not clear whether all three petitions were rejected or just one of them was rejected. He added that the stance of the Indian government and the Congress party was that the Pakistani government must look at the Sarabjit case from a humane point of view. He said that one would hope that considering all the facts and circumstances of the case the Pakistani government and the Pakistani President would take a humane decision on his mercy petition.

To a question, Shri Manish Tewari said that it would not be appropriate to call the handling of the Sarabjit issue as a “diplomatic failure”. He added that the Govenrment of India and the MEA was pursuing this matter very proactively. He said that the former External Affairs Minister Shri Pranab Mukherjee had also taken this issue up at the highest levels in Pakistan and had raised it in Parliament too. He reiterated that the government of India was engaged with the government of Pakistan and hoped that Sarbjit’s mercy petition would be dealt with compassionately.

To a question on whether the Congress party believed the version given by Sarabjit’s relatives that he was innocent and that this was a case of mistaken identity, Shri Manish Tewari said that the Congress party had no reason to disbelieve this. He added that eventually the matter was before the Pakistani courts. But he reiterated that the Congress party’s stance was that a decision should be taken in this case on the grounds of compassion.

To a question relating to the French President’s observations on the burqa, Shri Manish Tewari said that one’s dress is an expression of one‘s personal liberty. As long as it does not offend public morality, no government or individual should have any problem. He added that every country has different communities and cultures and the real meaning democracy and liberalism was to have equal respect for all.






(Tom Vadakkan)

Secretary, AICC