Karnataka: When legislators fail to behave

Laxmi Hebbalkar is in no mood to call it quits. The feisty Karnataka minister for women and child development is standing her ground: “I’ve come up in public life following a long struggle; it wasn’t easy for me… I am deeply hurt by the abusive language used by C.T. Ravi [BJP member of the legislative council or MLC] against me in the House… the legal battle will continue”, she said. “Some ministers supported me by releasing the video of Mr Ravi’s statement on social media and by publicly condemning the incident.”

The chairman of the legislative council, however, claimed that no video recording was made or retained after the House was adjourned. If video clips were circulating, they would have to be examined in forensic labs for authenticity, he added.

Hebbalkar’s ire needs some explaining. On 19 December, the BJP legislator exceeded all limits of decorum in political life and referred to Hebbalkar with a word meaning "woman of ill repute", triggering a blazing controversy in the southern state. The fact that Ravi is a former minister and BJP national secretary only made it worse; he was roundly condemned not only by the Congress but a wide cross-section of society.

The Mysuru chapter of PUCL (People's Union for Civil Liberties), Hindu seers, and others have all spoken out against Ravi. The PUCL drew attention to what it called the patriarchal and anti-women attitude of the BJP in publicly backing Ravi over the incident. The Karnataka State Women’s Commission has also called the charges serious, meriting a thorough investigation.

PUCL also sharply criticised the conduct of BJP politician Basavaraj Horatti for trying to close the chapter, saying it was under his leadership of the legislative council in Belagavi that the incident happened. Horatti has said there was no evidence to show that Ravi had made the remarks, which the legislator has denied making.

It should be noted that a first information report (FIR) was filed after some delay, which Karnataka home minister G. Parameshwara attributed to procedural issues in getting witness statements. However, the state police CID was now probing the matter, he announced, calling for the investigation to proceed without interference. Asked about Horatti closing the case, he was quoted as saying, “The police will do its duty. The council chairman (Horatti) will do his…”

The incident happened during a clash between the BJP and Congress over a remark attributed to Union home minister Amit Shah, denigrating Babasaheb Bhim Rao Ambedkar. As tensions rose, it is alleged that Ravi directed the obscene remark at Hebbalkar. She approached Horatti, the council chairman, to seek his intervention. However, BJP members said an altercation broke out when Hebbalkar accused Ravi of being a murderer.

The minister later clarified that BJP members were gesticulating and indulging in unseemly behaviour in front of her, passing unwarranted remarks against Congress leader Rahul Gandhi. She then responded by asking how they would react if she called Ravi a murderer for killing three people in an accident — a reference to the time Ravi’s driver mowed down two youngsters in a road accident. 

The situation then escalated and a confrontation ensued when Congress members tried to accost Ravi; the House marshals, seeing the situation, closed the corridor gates, preventing a physical standoff. The legislative council was then adjourned. Hebbalkar later released a clip of the incident in the council; this was after chief minister Siddaramaiah said there was both audio and video evidence available.

The issue came up in the legislative assembly, where Congress member Sharat Bachchegowda’s complaint was referred to the privileges committee by speaker U.T. Khader. BJP legislators opposed it, saying Ravi was not a member of the assembly, but the speaker said he was allowing it. The chief minister said the issue involved a criminal offence and harassment, and the police were investigating.

Horatti cast doubt on Hebbalkar’s charge, saying he had never heard a woman being so denigrated and spoken to so disrespectfully in the legislative precincts in his experience.

***

While Hebbalkar, who has been vocal on gender issues, seems determined to pursue the case, the BJP too has escalated the issue, claiming that the police wanted to kill Ravi, that he was mistreated etc. The council chairman, however, is on record stating that he was in constant touch with Ravi until 5.00 am on the day after his arrest and he had not complained of any ill-treatment. He also claimed that he had sent people to meet Ravi at the police station and they had reported that he was being treated well.

Ravi was released from police custody after the Karnataka High Court ruled that the arrest was illegal, since it violated due process. The court’s order was based on two grounds: one, since the offence involved imprisonment of less than seven years, the police should have served him a show-cause notice to appear before them for questioning; also, they had not produced records to show that they had issued an arrest memo stating the grounds for detention. Even if the incident had actually taken place, the police were duty bound to follow procedure, which they had not; and hence the arrest was prima facie illegal, the court ruled.

On Ravi’s counsel seeking court action for alleged head wounds suffered during arrest or afterward, the court noted that the medical certificate made no mention of it; but the court recommended a CT scan to rule out internal injury. Ravi had alleged that the police took him from place to place after his arrest and subjected him to abuse and torture. He claimed that he even feared being bumped off in a so-called encounter.

Union minister for steel and heavy industries H.D. Kumaraswamy of the JD(S) — which is part of the NDA at the Centre) — also waded into the issue, criticising the Congress government in Karnataka and the police for their actions. He said he closely followed politics in his home state, and asserted that if the BJP did the proper legal follow-up, the police officers could be held accountable for their actions.

He also accused the Congress government of harassing its opponents and using the police to settle scores, questioning why police had to arrest Ravi and transport him to different places at night; after all, he was an elected representative, and could have been directly produced in a magistrate’s court in Bengaluru. “Where was the need to humiliate him? Who is responsible for this?” he thundered.

Kumaraswamy also said the Congress had no business bringing up the Amit Shah matter as part of state proceedings. Shah’s remarks about Ambedkar were made in the Rajya Sabha, and the matter did not concern Karnataka; there was no need to debate it in the state legislative council, he added. He warned that any police officer who harassed Ravi on the direction of a minister would have to face the consequences.

The JD(S) leader also accused the government of using select police officers to carry out their agenda to target opponents, thereby abusing the law, but maintained a studied silence on Ravi calling Lok Sabha Leader of Opposition Rahul Gandhi a "drug addict" on the floor of the legislature.

With BJP leaders rallying round Ravi and he himself repeatedly denying the incident, Hebbalkar shot back with, “C.T. Ravi, you trust God, right? Come to dharmasthala. I will be present with my family. You also will have to come with your family and pledge before God and state that you have not used the word in the council."

Hebbalkar was born into a farming family in Belagavi (Belgaum) in north Karnataka, and has been active in politics for about two decades. She holds an MA in Political Science from the University of Mysuru and started off with the Congress Party’s mahila (women's) wing before rising to bigger positions in the state; she is now considered a political heavyweight in party circles.

Ravi, a firebrand BJP leader from the coffee growing district of Chikmagaluru, is known for his acid tongue. His party has already asked the state’s governor Thaawarchand Gehlot to order a judicial probe into the matter.

With verbal abuse becoming more frequent in Parliament and in state legislatures, people wonder if privileges of members should grant them immunity on one pretext or the other. Expunging the abuses from the records and erasing video evidence after the event do not do justice, is a growing consensus.