Ciurtesy The Hindu of date:
Cash for votes a way of political life in South India'                          
                                      
Sarah Hiddleston 

Politicians admit breaking election law: ‘yes, that's the great thing  about 
democracy'  

 
CHENNAI: Politicians and their aides in Tamil Nadu and Andhra Pradesh  admitted 
to violating election law to influence voters in the 2009 Lok  Sabha polls 
through payments in the form of cash, goods, or services,  according to a 
revealing cable sent to the State Department by Frederick  J. Kaplan, Acting 
Principal Officer of the U.S. Consulate-General in  Chennai. In conversations 
with a visiting consulate team, Karti  Chidambaram of the Congress, M. 
Patturajan, confidant of Union Minister  for Chemicals and Fertilizers M.K. 
Alagiri and former Mayor of Madurai,  and Member of Parliament Assaduddin 
Owaisi 
of the Majlis-e-Ittenhadul  Muslimeen spoke without inhibition about how they, 
their principals, or  their parties made payments to voters during the election 
campaign.
In a cable sent on May 13, 2009 ( 206688: confidential), accessed by  The Hindu 
through WikiLeaks, Mr. Kaplan detailed the role and impact of  money power in 
corrupting the electoral process, drawing from  information gathered from a 
variety of sources in the field: “Bribes  from political parties to voters, in 
the form of cash, goods, or  services, are a regular feature of elections in 
South India. Poor voters  expect bribes from political candidates, and 
candidates find various  ways to satisfy voter expectations. From paying to dig 
a community well  to slipping cash into an envelope delivered inside the 
morning  
newspaper, politicians and their operatives admitted to violating  election 
rules to influence voters. The money to pay the bribes comes  from the proceeds 
of fund-raising, which often crosses into political  corruption. Although the 
precise impact of bribery on voter behavior is  hard to measure, it no doubt 
swings at least some elections, especially  the close races.”
Wherever Mr. Kaplan and his colleagues went, “journalists,  politicians, and 
voters spoke of the bribes as a commonly accepted fact  of the election 
process.”
For example, during visits to slums in Chennai and Hyderabad, they  “learned 
that poor urban voters expect political parties to pay come  election time.” 
They were told by a DMK political strategist that “slums  are critical to a 
campaign because their population density and poverty  allows them to be more 
‘easily mobilized' by bribes.” Representatives  of a non-governmental 
organisation working in a Chennai slum said that  “the two main political 
parties in Tamil Nadu – the DMK and the AIADMK –  regularly bribe voters.” They 
described a “sophisticated operation” to  distribute cash: “Weeks before the 
elections agents of the parties come  to the neighborhood with cash carried in 
rice sacks. They have copies of  the voter lists and they distribute the money 
based on who is on the  list.” The agents come in the middle of the night, 
“between two and four  in the morning, when the Election Commission is asleep.”
‘Can I get another morning paper?'
In Madurai, “virtually every conversation centred on the  parliamentary 
candidacy of Mr. M.K. Azhagiri,” who according to Mr.  Kaplan had “added money” 
to his “political muscle” and was “using it to a  degree previously unseen in 
Tamil Nadu.” His “confidant” Mr. Patturajan  confirmed that cash payments were 
paid to voters by the DMK to secure  the Assembly seat in the January 2009 
by-election at Thirumangalam. “It  is no secret at all, Azhagiri paid 5,000 
rupees per voter in  Thirumangalam,” he is quoted as saying in the cable.
In an instructive and entertaining section titled ‘Can I get another  morning 
paper?' Mr. Kaplan explained the modus operandi for cash  distribution adopted 
by the DMK in Thirumangalam: “Rather than using the  traditional practice of 
handing cash to voters in the middle of the  night, in Thirumangalam, the DMK 
distributed money to every person on  the voting roll in envelopes inserted in 
their morning newspapers. In  addition to the money, the envelopes contained 
the 
DMK ‘voting slip'  which instructed the recipient for whom they should vote.” 
This, Mr.  Kaplan noted, “forced everyone to receive the bribe.” Mr. Patturajan 
,  he wrote, “confirmed the newspaper distribution method of handing out  
money, 
but questioned its efficiency. He [Patturajan] pointed out that  giving bribes 
every voter wasted money on committed anti-DMK voters, but  conceded that it 
was 
an effective way to ensure the cash reached every  potential persuadable voter”.
S. Kannan, a mid-level Congress party official in Madurai, told  consulate 
staff 
that “the 5,000 rupees per voter in Thirumangalam  changed everything,” noting 
that previous bribes to voters had topped  out at 500 rupees.
 
The cable reported that Mr. Patturajan expected difficulties in  replicating 
the 
Thirumangalam model for the 2009 parliamentary election  because the relevant 
Lok Sabha constituency was seven times the size of  the Assembly seat. 
According 
to the cable: “Azhagiri has been forced to  ratchet the payment back down to 
more typical levels, but he still plans  on giving it to every voter through 
the 
newspaper distribution method.”
Union Home Minister P. Chidambaram's 2009 Lok Sabha election campaign  in 
Sivaganga was managed by his son. According to the cable, Karti  Chidambaram 
specifically denied paying cash for votes, “but not because  of any moral 
objection to doing so. He does not pay cash for votes in  his rural 
constituency 
because it is impossible to distribute the money  effectively when the villages 
are spread so far apart.” But “the  President of the Tamil Nadu Youth 
Congress,” 
who is not named in the  cable, told the Chennai Consulate-General team: “Karti 
is doing a good  job in Sivaganga. He is distributing some money to the people, 
which his  father won't do.”
Karti Chidambaram admitted he “does give ‘a few sops' to villages  that might 
be 
on the fence about supporting his father.” Most villages  wanted a donation to 
the local temple and a community hall, he said. In  his cable, Mr. Kaplan 
summarised Karti's position: “bribes are useful  but not necessary to political 
success…bribes are one factor among many,  along with the quality of the 
candidate, the strength of the party, and  the issues. But he cautioned that 
bribes alone will not prevail.” Anil  Ambani, Karti is quoted as saying, “can't 
win an election just by paying  people off. It doesn't work that way.” 
Candidates needed a strong party  apparatus in order to win elections, but 
“bribes can help put you over  the top” in a close race.
“Worthy requests” by constituents were worth considering, mused MIM's  Mr. 
Owaisi in a separate conversation with consulate staff over a late  dinner in 
Hyderabad after a long day campaigning. According to Mr.  Kaplan's cable, Mr. 
Owaisi tried to make a distinction between cash  bribes given by rivals and 
payments to voters by his own party: “One  community's leaders asked Owaisi 
that 
day to dig them a well. ‘So I sent  one of my party men back later in the day,' 
he explained, ‘to give them  25,000 rupees (approximately 500 USD).' Owaisi 
emphasized that he does  not give cash directly to voters, but rather funds 
worthy requests: ‘If  they want a well, I give them the money, but make sure 
they use it for  the well.' On the same day, he also told us that he had paid 
35,000  rupees (700 USD) to pay for the marriage of an orphaned girl. Owaisi  
contrasted his practice of funding projects for the community's benefit  with 
the Congress and Telugu Desam parties, which Owaisi said pay money  to 
individual voters.”
Surprised by such candid responses, the U.S. Consulate-General  officials asked 
Mr. Owaisi if donations like wells or marriage fees were  not illegal. “Of, 
course,” came the reply, “but that's the great thing  about democracy.” 



________________________________


      

Reply via email to