Follow us on


Letters to the Editor

Print edition : Jul 06, 2022 T+T-

John Pilger


THE words of John Pilger echo what he lives for and believes in: “We support the underdog” (Cover Story, December 21). He recounted how the U.S. made a distinction between good terrorism and bad terrorism to suit its nefarious interests. His views on Barack Obama, Julian Assange and Edward Snowden are convincingly substantiated.

He identified the march of Indian farmers from Haridwar to New Delhi (September 23 to October 2) as the most profound political promise of revolutionary fervour in the world in recent times.

Ayyasseri Raveendranath

Aranmula, Kerala

The police

FROM independence no politician has ever attempted to give the police the freedom to function independently (“The police & the Constitution”, December 21). Various committee reports on police reforms are gathering dust. During investigations, evidence is manufactured and/or collected as per the convenience of vested interests, with scant regard for justice. The judiciary has no alternative but to decide cases on the basis of such evidence. Laws get mangled by the police at the initial stage of the investigation.

Politicians use the police to protect goons and send their opponents to jail. The chaos in society starts at this point. Innocent people who become victims of such a corrupt system are left with no alternative but to secure justice by taking the law into their own hands, resorting to violence if necessary.

M.N. Bhartiya

Alto-Porvorim, Goa

Sardar Patel

A NATION is not united by erecting huge statues but through exemplary, unselfish deeds, and Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel was an embodiment of this (“Patel statue and pillage of history”, December 21).

Curiously, no leader from other parties or Chief Ministers from other States were invited to participate in the inauguration of the “Statue of Unity”. Many would say that Sardar Patel was the best Prime Minister we never had.

There is a needless debate on which party can claim his legacy. Leaders of the calibre of Sardar Patel, Subhas Chandra Bose, Bal Gangadhar Tilak, Sarojini Naidu or C. Rajagopalachari rendered yeoman service to the country and are beyond party labels. The consolidation of India will remain Sardar Patel’s greatest contribution. M.A. Jinnah played the communal card to gain personal power. He realised his folly before he died.

Whatever their faults, Jawaharlal Nehru and Sardar Patel dragged India back from that precipice. As true statesmen, they rose above their personal differences in the interests of the nation.

H.N. Ramakrishna


WITHOUT any doubt, it is important to pay tributes to Sardar Patel (“Sardar as pawn”, November 23). But was it necessary to spend a whopping amount of money on a statue when there are so many burning issues that need to be sorted out? India’s pride does not reside in a statue but in its “unity in diversity” and its cultural values. Sadly, under the current government, communal tensions are on the rise. The Narendra Modi government cannot fool people with a statue.

Vidhya B. Ragunath

Thanjavur, Tamil Nadu


NEITHER Hindus nor Muslims wanted to pray at the disputed site in Ayodhya until the demolition of the mosque on December 6, 1992 (Cover Story, December 7). Just because there is a Hindu majority in India, some political parties and Hindu organisations have made Ram temple a political issue. They are well aware that India is a secular democracy with a rich heritage that includes different faiths.

But it is sad that these political parties want to earn political mileage out of the Ayodhya issue. One appeals to these political parties to reconsider their demand for a Ram temple and to prioritise finding solutions to the many problems the country faces.

Ashok K. Nihalani

Pune, Maharashtra


IT is surprising that a Supreme Court that constituted a bench at 1:15 a.m. to hear a petition in May 2018 relating to the swearing-in of B.S. Yeddyurappa in Karnataka is now in no hurry to take up the Sabarimala review petition (“Pilgrimage politics”, December 7). The lone dissenting judge was right when she said the court could not impose its rationality on matters of religion.

With over 50,000 cases pending in the apex court and around three crore cases pending for the past 10 years in lower courts, should courts venture into areas reserved for the executive and the legislature?

B.R. Ambedkar believed that the Supreme Court should be easily accessible to the common man. It is time the apex court reverted to the status quo ante on Sabarimala.

Kangayam R. Narasimhan


From the digital edition

IT was startling to hear from a retired Supreme Court judge that some of the actions of Justice Dipak Misra during his tenure as CJI indicated that he was under some external influence (“Kurian Joseph stirs the pot on CJI’s functioning”, Dispatches, December 4). This perception was brought to the CJI’s attention many times by several judges, but as it continued to persist among the judges, four of them, Justices J. Chelameswar, Ranjan Gogoi, Kurian Joseph and Madan B. Lokur, held a press conference and ventilated their grievances about the sorry state of affairs prevailing in the Supreme Court.

One hopes that under the present CJI, this perception will no longer prevail and the Supreme Court will continue to be the citadel of justice in the country.

N.C. Sreedharan

Kannur, Kerala