It was not outrage but a sense of disorientation that was more pronounced in CPM state secretary M V Govindan's first response to Nilambur MLA P V Anvar's sacrilegious remarks against Kerala Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan on September 26.
During a press conference held in New Delhi on September 27, Govindan did make the right noises but something seemed to hold him back from going all out against Anvar. He said that Anvar had become the "hatchet" in the hands of right-wing forces and even exhorted comrades and the public to rise up against Anvar, a call that could be interpreted as an incitement to violence.
Even then, Govindan sounded careful not to provoke Anvar further. He gave the impression that Anvar was out of the LDF Parliamentary Party only because Anvar wanted it, not because the CPM forced the move. "It was he who left the LDF. It was he who said that he would not participate in the LDF Parliamentary Party meeting," the state secretary said.
When asked why the party took so long to take a stand against Anvar, Govindan hinted that the party had chosen to be tolerant. "It is not our policy to push someone away from us. We have come to this stand (of disowning Anvar) only after he severed ties with the LDF," the state secretary said.
Govindan took this tolerance approach to the extreme, at the risk of even setting off the perception that the party was still eager to pacify Anvar. "We had no intention of pushing Anvar out, neither earlier nor now," he said.
Govindan was also not as certain as the Chief Minister about P Sasi's credibility. On September 21, the Chief Minister said that his political secretary did "exemplary work" and unmistakably ruled out an official or party-level probe against him. This was widely seen as a dare thrown at the party that was considering, or had already begun, a scrutiny into the activities of Sasi.
But on Friday Govindan reiterated what he had said two days ago, that a probe against Sasi based on Anvar's charges was already going on in the party.
And he backed this up with a startling remark. He said the charges against Sasi would also be made part of the official DGP-level inquiry that has been ordered by the government. On the face of it, this looks like an encroachment into the CM's domain.
If on September 21 the Chief Minister assumed the role of the state secretary and arbitrarily rejected any kind of probe into Sasi's affairs, Govindan on Friday looked to have paid the CM back in the same coin. He publicly declared what should have ideally been left to the CM to decide.
It is still not clear how the CM would respond to the party boss's diktat. Perhaps, including Sasi within the ambit of the DGP’s probe would have been a decision jointly taken by the CM and the state secretary.
Nonetheless, it was obvious that Govindan wanted to make a clear distinction between the party and the Chief Minister. "The Chief Minister's opinion about Sasi is based on his experience. As the political secretary, it is the CM who knows him the most. But when it comes to our level, we will carry out an inquiry if there is a need for it," Govindan said.
The party secretary also seemed disturbed by the perception that the Chief Minister was needlessly protecting ADGP M R Ajith Kumar who himself had admitted that he had met top RSS leaders. This concern for the ADGP is feeding the rumour that the CPM, especially the CM, had struck a dishonourable pact with the Sangh Parivar.
Govindan on Friday made a subtle attempt to disengage the party from the ADGP. "No one is under any obligation to protect the ADGP," he said, and stressed: "especially the party."
And unlike the CM, the party secretary did not seem keen to impute darker motives to Anvar than his repeated charge that the MLA had turned into a mouthpiece for right-wing forces and their media. The CM, on the other hand, had said early on Friday that his suspicions about Anvar had been vindicated after his September 26 Nilambur press conference. Meaning, he is working for gold smugglers.
CPM Malappuram district secretary E N Mohandas, too, had made a similar charge. But not Govindan. The state secretary only had a note of warning. Citing a judgement in the Arvind Kejriwal case, in which the Delhi police had used the words of the accused against the Delhi CM, Govindan told Anvar that it was legally improper of him to use gold smuggling accused in his fight against the government. Govindan was referring to the two gold carriers that Anvar had managed to interview on camera to expose the police role in smuggling.
