In Tamil Nadu there is anger and dismay, and also the fear that Karnataka may refuse to implement even the final orders of the Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal.
HAS Karnataka declared itself another country? Has it seceded from India?'' was the reaction at the popular and political levels in Tamil Nadu to Karnataka's refusal to release Cauvery water in defiance of the Supreme Court order of October 4. This is the second time in a month that the Karnataka government has refused to obey the orders of both the Supreme Court and the Cauvery River Authority (CRA) to release 0.8 tmc ft of water every day to Tamil Nadu, a lower riparian State.
Political parties in Tamil Nadu were unanimous in viewing the Karnataka Cabinet's decision as a threat to India's unity and an assault on the country's federal structure. Tamil Nadu Chief Minister Jayalalalithaa said it was "a brazen assault on the rule of law, on democratic traditions and on Indian federalism, making a mockery of our Constitution". The All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (AIADMK) general secretary pointed out that the Karnataka Cabinet had chosen to do this when a contempt petition filed by Tamil Nadu against Karnataka for refusing to release Cauvery water as per the Supreme Court's order on September 3 was pending. Jayalalithaa demanded that the Centre "should no longer remain a mute spectator to this outrageous conduct of the Karnataka government which strikes at the very root of the unity of our country".
"As the directives of the Supreme Court are being openly and flagrantly flouted," she said Prime Minister A.B. Vajpayee should consider "the wider fissiparous implications of such roguish conduct on the part of a State government on our federal polity... " She demanded that he "issue directions forthwith" to the Karnataka government under Article 256 to comply with the directions of the Supreme Court, and dismiss it under Article 356 in case of its "continued intransigence and recalcitrance.'' She feared that Cauvery delta farmers would face unprecedented suffering and famine unless Karnataka immediately released water.
Duraimurugan, Public Works Minister in the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) governments led by M. Karunanidhi, was equally exercised. Duraimurugan asked, "If a State does not obey the Supreme Court's order or the equally powerful CRA, then what is the fate [of the country]? If every State starts behaving like this, where is the unity of the country?" N. Varadarajan, secretary of the State committee of the Communist Party of India (Marxist), said Karnataka's decision amounted to contempt of court and made "a mockery of the Constitutition". R. Nallakannu, secretary of the State Council of the Communist Party of India (CPI), appealed to all those "interested in the unity of the country to compel Karnataka and the Centre to release Tamil Nadu's due share of water".
P. Chidambaram, president of the Congress Democratic Forum and former Union Finance Minister, accused Karnataka of setting a "dangerous trend" by refusing to obey Supreme Court and CRA directives. Vazhappadi K. Ramamurthi, Congress(I) leader, renewed his demand for the dismissal of the S.M. Krishna government. The Tamil Nadu Congress Committee had earlier served a notice on Ramamurthi asking him to explain why action should not be taken against him for demanding the dismissal of the Congress(I) government in Karnataka. In 1991, Ramamurthi had resigned from the P.V. Narasimha Rao Cabinet, unhappy with the Prime Minister's stand on the issue.
S. Ranganathan, secretary, Cauvery Delta Farmers' Welfare Association, called it "a dangerous sign". He said that Krishna's "singular acts of flouting the CRA's and the Supreme Court's directives will create precedents for future generations to disobey similar orders". Ranganathan accused Krishna of "totally destroying" the `kuruvai' and `samba' paddy crops in Tamil Nadu by his refusal to release water and also creating "havoc" in Mandya district in Karnataka. "The net result is there is bitterness on both sides. This is Krishna's contribution" to the Cauvery issue, he said.
Karnataka's decision has stoked fears whether at all it will implement the final order of the Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal. The final phase of arguments by the riparian States of Tamil Nadu, Karnataka and Kerala, and the Union Territory of Pondicherry are being advanced now before the three-member Tribunal. The final order is expected early next year.
KARNATAKA'S decision had an unexpected fallout. The Opposition parties rallied around Jayalalithaa in sharp contrast to the deep division that existed earlier. All parties slammed the Karnataka government. The Tamil film industry also lined up behind the State government.
On October 4, the Supreme Court directed the Karnataka government to release forthwith 0.8 tmc ft to Tamil Nadu daily in the manner indicated by the September 8 order of the CRA headed by the Prime Minister. The three-member Bench told Karnataka in clear terms that "that there is no question of non-compliance of the CRA's order" and that it was "bound to obey and comply with the Prime Minister's order". Krishna had earlier refused to abide by the CRA's order of September 8 too. On September 30, the Bench had asked the Cauvery Monitoring Committee (CMC) to visit the Mettur dam to find out its water level and assess the "ground realities" with regard to the crop situation in the Cauvery delta areas in Tamil Nadu. So the CMC, headed by A.K. Goswami, Secretary, Union Ministry for Water Resources, inspected the Mettur dam and toured Thanjavur, Tiruvarur and Nagapattinam districts in Tamil Nadu, and the Karaikaal region in Pondicherry on October 1 and 2.
In its report, the CMC said the storage position in Mettur "was very poor this year" with a water availability of 12.913 tmc ft on October 1 against the storage capacity of 93 tmc ft. The "majority of the farmers" in the delta districts in Tamil Nadu "were not able to transplant and harvest the kuruvai rice crop (June-September)," it said. This was mainly because of the failure of the southwest monsoon in the whole catchment, resulting in delayed release of water from Mettur (water was released from September 6 instead of the normal June 12). About the samba crop (August-January) normally cultivated on about 11 lakh acres (4.4 lakh hectares) including 8,000 acres (3,200 ha) in the Karaikaal region, the CMC report said that "this year, the farmers, to a large extent, have not been able to transplant this crop as yet (October 1, 2002) due to inadequate water supplies for land preparation."
The report added that farmers' representatives impressed upon the team that "this year the kuruvai crop has been largely lost and only release from Mettur now will help the adequate growth of the samba crop to enable it to withstand the ravages of the northeast monsoon in October, which batters the delta with heavy floods followed by cyclones in November and December." There was loss of wages, and shortage of fodder. The depletion of groundwater to abnormal levels had caused drinking water problems. In Karaikaal, 80 per cent of the agricultural workers remained idle.
The report concluded that the samba crop was still in the nursery stage and its transplantation needed to be completed by the end of October for the best results. It said: "The water requirement for this operation for an expected crop area of approximately 11 lakh acres works out to about 63 tmc ft. In addition, 10 tmc ft of water is required for drinking water supply and evaporation losses (up to May 2003). As on September 30, the total availability of water in Mettur reservoir, which is the source of supply to these areas, is 13.305 tmc ft. The northeast monsoon generally sets in the delta area towards the end of the third week of October as confirmed by the India Meteorological Department (IMD)."
The Supreme Court considered this report on October 4 and directed Karnataka to release 0.8 tmc ft to Tamil Nadu every day at the Mettur dam. But the Karnataka Cabinet ruled out any such supply.
As farmers in Mandya and Mysore districts in Karnataka resorted to violence and Kannada film actors led by Rajkumar took out a rally in Bangalore on September 25, demanding that no water should be provided to Tamil Nadu, the Tamizhaga Vivasayigal Sangam, led by M.R. Sivasamy, and the Tamil film industry reacted. The Sangam observed a bandh in the Cavuery delta districts of Thanjavur, Tiruvarur and Nagapattinam on September 30. It rejected a call from Jayalalithaa not to go ahead with the bandh because she was confident that Tamil Nadu would receive justice in the Supreme Court. While the bandh was successful in the rural areas, it was partial in towns. At a couple of places, farmers blocked trains.
What made the Tamil film industry jump into the fray was Rajkumar's participation in the rally, when it had stood by him during his abduction by forest brigand Veerappan in 2000. Tamil film director Bharathiraja and actor Satyaraj, who took the lead in organising the protest move, announced that the Tamil film industry would take out a rally at Neyveli on October 12 and block electricity being wheeled to the Karnataka grid from the Centrally owned Neyveli Lignite Corporation. Bharathiraja said the rally was aimed at letting know the Centre the feelings of the Tamil people. He said, "We kept quiet because the Cauvery problem was in the Supreme Court and it was a Centre-State issue. Film artists should rise above race and language. If we don't reply to the big rally taken out by the Kannada film artists against Tamilians, it will amount to our being shameless." The DMK, the Marumalarchi Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (MDMK), the Pattali Makkal Katchi (PMK) and the BJP backed the rally plan.
However, actor Rajnikant struck a discordant note. He stood isolated when he said the Tamil film industry should reconsider its decision about the rally. He said he supported the plans to express solidarity with farmers on the Cauvery issue, but the decision on the manner of its implementation should be reconsidered. Film actors and political parties denounced Rajnikant for his stand. His effigies were burnt in several towns. Bharathiraja ruled out any reconsideration. Rajnikant hurriedly backed down and decided to take part in the rally. However, after agreeing to participate in the rally, Rajnikant performed a somersault. He said: "I will not take part in the agitation which wants blood to flow from Karnataka. I will only take part in the demonstration which asks for water." He suggested that a memorandum could be submitted in Chennai itself. These remarks fuelled protests in the Tamil film industry and in the political parties. Bharathiraja said that it was Karnataka that hit Tamil Nadu below the belt. He asserted that the Neyveli rally would take place as scheduled on behalf of a newly formed organisation, the Tamilians' Protection Committee.
Attention will turn again on the Supreme Court as Jayalalithaa has announced that her government will file a second contempt application against the Karnataka government for disobeying the apex court's order of October 4. It will also file a suit against the Karnataka government for payment of damages and compensation for the loss of the kuruvai crop and the suffering endured by the Tamil Nadu people owing to Karnataka's "recalcitrance".
COMMents
COMMents
SHARE