Trouble erupted in the IUML when IUML state president Syed Hyderali Shihab Thangal’s son, Syed Mueenali Thangal, openly criticized Kunhalikutty at a press conference the other day. Mueenali, who is the vice-president of the Muslim Youth League, accused Kunhalikutty of being responsible for the Enforcement Directorate’s(ED) summons to his father in connection with the alleged fraud in Chandrika newspaper, the IUML’s mouthpiece. Mueen said Kunhalikutty’s actions put such pressure on his father that he had to be hospitalised.

The meeting reportedly witnessed heated exchanges between the senior leaders of the party. Reports have it that Kunhalikutty demanded action against Mueenali for his intemperate outburst against him. But other leaders like MK Muneer, MLA, party general secretary ET Mohammed Basheer and Abdul Wahab opposed any action against Mueenali on the ground that it would tarnish the image of the party. Kunhalikutty found himself isolated at the meeting. Except general secretary PMA Salam nobody supported Kunhalikutty

If this was bad enough, worse was to come. The meeting also suspended Rafi Puthiakadavu, a close confidant of Kunhalikutty, who abused Mueenali at the press conference. The failure to prevent action against his aide constitutes a serious setback to Kunhalikutty. The sullen silence of the IUML strongman at the press conference held after the meeting was self-explanatory. This was the first press meet where Kunhalikutty did not speak. The body Language betrayed his displeasure at the turn of events. The meeting, however, deplored the open criticism made by Mueenali against Kunhalikutty. Action against him was avoided following the strong stand taken by the Thangal family. But that was cold comfort for Kunhalikutty, who failed to have his way in the matter.

There is no denying that the crisis has caused acute embarrassment to the IUML. But the party will have to discuss and find solutions to the allegations against Kunhalikutty. It simply cannot afford to brush them under the carpet and pretend that everything is hunky dory. Mueenali has linked Kunhalikuttty to the money laundering case against Chandrika daily. ED had summoned Hyderali Thangal as he is the IUML president. Thangal could not appear before the ED as he is in hospital. Chandrika’s finance director, PMA Sameer, who has also been asked to appear before the ED, failed to answer the summons, too. Sameer is said to be a staunch Kunhalikutty loyalist.

This is not the first time that Mueenali has criticized Kunhalikutty. When the IUML strongman resigned as the Lok Sabha MP from Malappuram to contest in the State Assembly elections, Mueen made no secret of his displeasure against the move, which he felt brought a bad name to the party. There is a perception that Kunhalikutty had contested the Lok Sabha elections hoping that the Congress-led United Progressive Alliance (UPA) would win the Lok Sabha elections and form the government at the Centre. If the UPA had won, Kunhalikutty would have become a Union Minister. But that did not happen. And Kunhalikutty returned to state politics by quitting the MP’s post. Although many other leaders resented Kunhalikutty’s action, they did not come out openly against him. Mueenali was the sole exception.

Meanwhile, Mueenali has managed to secure more support from IUML leaders. Party MLA, M K Muneer, a rival of Kunhalikutty, did not name him. But what he said was significant. Different opinions will be raised at a meeting. That did not mean that someone is being sidelined. What matters is the outcome of the talks. There is also no concentration of power in one person in the party, Muneer opined, adding that if there was such a thing, the discussions would not have taken place.

IUML state secretary K M Shaji characterized the entire episode as an activation of democracy! In his Facebook comments, Shaji said criticism and dissent are part of democracy which is getting activated. This is what is happening in Muslim League, he commented. Shaji, however, added another post later saying that his earlier one had been misinterpreted. There is room for discussions in the party and the party will move forward unitedly. The discussions which took place are the result of the higher democratic values shown by the Panakkad Thangal family and leaders including Kunhalikutty.

IUML MLA KPA Majeed, however, claimed that there were no differences in the party. There was no move at the meeting to isolate Kunhalikutty, he said, adding that there was unanimity at the meeting that what Mueenali did was against the interests of the party. The news that appeared in the media was aimed at maligning the party, he pointed out. Majeed, incidentally, is a staunch Kunhalikutty loyalist.

Interestingly, LDF-backed Independent MLA KT Jaleel, a minister in the previous Pinarayi Government, added a new dimension to the issue by openly sounding a warning to Kunhalikutty. Jaleel, who had been expelled from IUML following differences with Kunhalikutty a few years back, claimed to be in possession of an audio clip against Kunhalikutty. He challenged Kunhalikutty to take action against Mueenali. If action is taken, he would release the clip, and Kunhalikutty would have to end his political life, Jaleel crowed. Since no action has been taken against Mueenali, Jaleel said he would not release the audio clip for the time being. Kunhalikutty and company had harassed him no end during the last five years. Roles have been reversed. And now it is his chance to ‘return the compliments’ to Kunhalikutty, Jaleel said. The ED, Jaleel said, should have summoned Kunhalikutty and not Hyderali Thangal.

Significantly, the Congress has not made any comment on the turmoil within the IUML. Leader of the Opposition, V D Satheesan, is on record that the imbroglio in IUML is an internal matter. There is a limitation for us to intervene. Jaleel should not have dragged the name of a venerable leader like Syed Hyderali Shihab Thangal into the row, Satheesan opined. On their part, CPI(M) and other LDF leaders have savaged the Congress for failing to say anything about the IUML crisis.

The refusal of the Congress to comment on the issue proves without any shadow of doubt that the Congress does not have the courage to open its mouth against the IUML, which is the de facto leader of the UDF. It is significant to note that when Congress was plagued by intra-party differences, the IUML did not adopt the same attitude. It squarely blamed the Congress for the assembly election defeat, saying that the rift within the Congress was one of the main reasons why the UDF lost the electoral battle.

It is also a fact that the rumblings in the IUML have caused grave concern to the UDF. A weakening of the IUML is a luxury the UDF cannot afford at this crucial juncture when the Front is struggling to recover from the devastating electoral blow. The UDF has already been considerably weakened following the exit of Kerala Congress(M) Jose faction and the Loktantrik Janata Dal (LJD). Debilitation of the IUML will result in the disintegration of the UDF. (IPA Service)