The opposition Left Democratic Front (LDF) had a golden opportunity to occupy the moral high ground. But it wasted the chance, mainly because of the front leader CPI(M)’s anxiety to ensure short-term gains.

The opportunity presented itself when an MLA and former minister belonging to the Janata Dal(S), a constituent of the LDF, was charged with sexual abuse by a woman known to the ex-minister and his son. The LDF should have grabbed the chance with both hands and persuaded the MLA to resign pending an investigation. Such a stand would have lent added strength to the LDF’s ongoing agitation against the Oommen Chandy Government, demanding the Chief Minister’s resignation over the solar panel scam.

To their credit, both leader of the opposition, VS Achuthanandan, and the CPI, have taken the principled stand that Jose Thettayil should resign to uphold the values of probity and political morality in public life. Failure to do so would considerably weaken the LDF’s anti-government agitation, they contended. Their stance makes eminent political sense.

But the official wing of the CPI(M) led by state secretary Pinarayi Vijayan and JD(S) state president Mathew T Thomas think otherwise. Their reasoning: there is no need for the MLA to quit at this juncture. Let the investigation be over, says Pinarayi. Sexual harassment charges had been leveled against UDF leaders K B Ganesh Kumar and Congress MLA A T George but they had not resigned. So goes their argument.

Moreover, this was a high-level political conspiracy to trap Jose Thettayil, and everyone was aware of this fact. Mathew Thomas is learnt to have told Vijayan that the case against the JD(S) MLA would not stand legal scrutiny.

Also, the CPI(M) and the JD(S) are credited with the view that it would be politically unwise to risk a by-election at this point of time from Angamaly, Thettayil’s constituency, especially when there is no guarantee that the LDF would win again. Angamaly is a traditional UDF stronghold, and Jose had wrested it from the UDF with great difficulty in the 2011 assembly polls. Now, with the sexual abuse charge slapped against him, it would be extremely difficult, if not impossible, for him to repeat the 2011 performance, contend the CPI(M) and the JD(S). Hence their reluctance to insist on Thettayil’s resignation. An electoral defeat barely a year away from the crucial Lok Sabha elections, would only dent the LDF’s morale, which is quite high at present, they assert.

Achuthanandan is, however, not prepared to buy this argument. If Thettayil does not quit, the LDF agitation would lose its moral strength, VS points out. People won’t forgive leaders who misbehave with women, VS asserts, adding that Thettayil has no option but to resign. In fact, VS has asked CPI(M) general secretary Prakash Karat to demand the JD(S) MLA’s early resignation.

The CPI has fully backed VS’s stand on the issue. The party’s state executive has decided to insist on the MLA’s resignation but it would not raise the issue publicly. The executive authroised state secretary Panniyan Ravindran and C Divakaran to convey the stand to the JD(S) leadership.

In retrospect, it would seem that the LDF could have gained immensely if it had directed the JD(S) MLA to quit pending a probe. But that was not to be. A golden opportunity to turn even adversity to account has been lost. And the LDF could be the worse for it, both politically and electorally. (IPA Service)