Jayalalithaa’s passing away

S Nihal Singh

THE death of J Jayalalithaa highlights the uniqueness of the Dravidian movement —the AIADMK branch of it —and the two singular leaders it produced in recent times ruled the state with a panache unparalleled in the history of our country. Indeed, the main Dravidian ethos was a pioneer in Indian politics of social engineering the rest of the country was later to follow.

Jayalalithaa was a diligent pupil of MG Ramachandran, universally known as MGR, who blazed his way from films to politics in an arc that made him revered and legendary in a milieu prone to hero worship. It is as if the film and political words had merged to provide the people with entertainment and governance of a particular kind.

 Despite the power struggle after MGR’s death, Jayalalithaa came out on top and lived her own tempestuous political life after her screen career ended. She had learned the art of statecraft well from her master MGR and although her rule involved suffering charges of corruption, spells in jail and her ultimate acquittal, she had built up her own style of governance consolidating power by virtue of her remoteness and enjoyed the public devotion of her ministers who publicly prostrated full length in their concept of greeting her.

 It was an alchemy that served her well even as the extensive welfare schemes for the poor and the less well-off snowballed, much of her munificence at taxpayer’s expense often embossed with the picture of Amma, as she was universally known. It was as if the Mother was the source of common food items scaling up to television sets and computers for the needy. The irreproachable Mother was blessing her people from afar displaying the victory sign with a smile.

 Jayalalithaa had the advantage of Tamil Nadu’s efficient civil servants to carry out her orders even as her ministers were at her beck and call, having surrendered their independent judgment at her feet by their act of prostration. There was never a murmur from them and those who expressed an opinion or indulged in action not to her liking faced immediate dismissal.

 It was more a royal court environment after the task of winning elections was over, and in common with the ways of such settings, intrigue was never far behind. It came in the form of her constant companion Sasikala Natarajan — banished for a time mainly because of her relations’ intrusion into the mistresses’ household — but later returned to her favour. Indeed, during the leader’s stay in hospital she was the gatekeeper in permitting access to the patient.

 The final chapter of Jayalalithaa’s life had a twist of mystery as the AIADMK legislators were first herded together in the hospital, then asked to assemble at party headquarters, then bussed to the Governor’s residence for the swearing in for Mr Panneerselvam, the leader’s loyalist stand-in, for his immediate swearing in. This drama was being enacted even as Jayalalithaa was pronounced dead.

Which brings us to Sasikala’s future role in the party — she is being mentioned as a possible general secretary — although the leader was careful in not giving her any post during her lifetime. The proliferation of her relations at the mourning ceremonies was remarkable — after they had been banished from the chief minister’s house. Sasikala herself endured imprisonment with her mistress when the latter was jailed on corruption charges.

 Future events will determine the extent to which Sasikala will run the affairs of the AIADMK and further the interests of her family. That she played an important role in choreographing events after the leader’s death is beyond doubt. The opposition DMK, with an ailing leader in Mr Karunanidhi and his son Stalin, will be among the most avid followers of new tensions in the post-Jayalalithaa phase of the AIADMK.

 The political setting in Tamil Nadu raises several questions about the nature of Dravidian politics and what lies ahead. Imperious and autocratic leaders are not restricted to the Dravidian parties. What is unique about them is the merging of the screen and political worlds to effect a striking combination of aura recalling the gods and goddesses of yore. And when the leader appears in the form of a munificent provider of food and goodies such as sewing machines and television sets, the illusion of the divine takes root in the eyes of the poor and the needy. Significantly, in the mourning rituals of the less well off the slogans often repeated were: Why have you left us Mother? Who will provide for our needs?

 Beyond these arguments, are the people of Tamil Nadu more prone to extreme forms of devotion to leaders than the citizens of the rest of the country? Cases of self-immolation are not uncommon in other parts of the country and indulging in self-injury to express intense devotion to a leader occurs elsewhere too. However, it would seem that the emotional content of devotion to a leader is far higher in Tamil consciousness as is the tendency to give divine attributes to the leader.

 However, political analysts will watch carefully the future trajectory of the AIADMK without its star attraction. In his acting role as chief minister on several occasions, Mr Panneerselvam took an understated posture and during her last hospital stay he held cabinet meetings displaying a portrait of Jayalalithaa in the CM’s chair. How will he acquit himself now that he is his own man?

 That indeed is the nub of the problem. Much speculation in political circles in Chennai revolves round the future role of Sasikala. Was the incredibly speedy installation of the new chief minister born out of an understanding between the two on the favour offered in return for a wish granted? Even in the event of Mr Panneerselvam asserting himself, will he able to carry himself with dignity in his new role?

The second question revolves round the attitude of the new chief minister’s colleagues. Will they be as submissive to him as they were to Jayalalithaa? The nub of the question is: Will the AIADMK split?