It is one of those paradoxes of Indian politics that the reopening of the fodder scam cases against Lalu Yadav, whose Rashtriya Janata Dal is a partner in the coalition government in Bihar, should bring relief to Chief Minister Nitish Kumar, as it is expected to. It may also lend greater cohesion to the ruling alliance, and that too is an irony. However, a weakening of the Rashtriya Janata Dal could have a bearing on the coalition’s prospects in 2019.
Lalu Yadav under greater pressure means Nitish Kumar under less pressure. Ever since the coalition government came to power in Patna in 2015, it used to be said that Yadav interfered in its functioning. The mandate had given the Rashtriya Janata Dal 81 seats and Nitish Kumar’s Janata Dal (United) 71 seats in the 243-member Assembly. Kumar became chief minister, but Yadav bargained hard and succeeded in getting his two sons installed as ministers. The younger of them, 28-year-old Tejashwi Yadav, is the deputy chief minister. Though Kumar and Yadav – colleagues turned rivals – had sunk their differences to come together to defeat a resurgent BJP in Bihar, the pinpricks continued.
The Supreme Court has directed a separate re-trial in four fodder scam cases because the offence was committed at different times and the misappropriation of funds had taken place from the treasury in different places. While the Jharkhand High Court had convicted Lalu Yadav in one case in 2013 – and he was sent to jail till bail was given to him a few months later (he has also been debarred from contesting elections for 11 years) – it had acquitted him of charges of criminal conspiracy on the grounds that he could not be tried for the same offence in more than one case. The Supreme Court has now rejected this argument.
The political upshot of the apex court’s directive is that Yadav could go to jail again, and this possibility cannot be ruled out. If found guilty in any of these four cases – and arguments have been concluded in three of them – it entails the end of his electoral career, and his debarment from elections could be prolonged.
Weakened RJD
If Yadav is imprisoned, the Rashtriya Janata Dal will be bereft of his stewardship on a day-to-day basis. Consequently, the party will become more dependent on Kumar. The alleged meddling in government by Rashtriya Janata Dal leaders would naturally reduce. While the Supreme Court’s ruling may have brought some comfort to Kumar, there is no threat to the Bihar government. However, a Cabinet reshuffle a few months down the line cannot be ruled out. At the moment, many of the 12 Rashtriya Janata Dal ministers hold plum portfolios, but Kumar could go for a rejig to accommodate more members from his own party in his cabinet.
With a weakened party, Rashtriya Janata Dal leaders are not likely to do anything that could rock the boat, and send them out of power. They are aware of Kumar’s penchant for sudden turnarounds. They also know that once out of power, a chunk of the party’s Yadav base could gravitate towards the BJP, as happened in 2014. Could others look to join the Janata Dal (United)?
Fears have been expressed about the fate of the mahagathbandan, or the grand alliance of the Janata Dal (United), Rashtriya Janata Dal and Congress in Bihar. There is no reason why Kumar should not keep the alliance going just because Yadav is being re-tried or even if he goes to jail, for he is not part of the government. He is anyway convicted in one case. It is more the allegations made against Yadav’s two sons – both ministers – for illegal acquisition of land and wealth, which could worry Kumar.
Blow for Yadav
The Supreme Court’s directive comes as a huge setback for Yadav personally. It also comes as an upset for the Rashtriya Janata Dal as a party. For though Yadav hinted at the possibility of anointing Tejashwi Yadav as his successor at the party conclave in Rajgir recently, his sons are young and will take time to shape up.
It also rules out Yadav in the role of a sutradhar or anchor of opposition unity. For if he is convicted in more cases, other Opposition parties would be wary of giving him an overt role. For instance, soon after the Uttar Pradesh poll outcome, Yadav had been quick to take the initiative and talk to Mayawati to urge her to move towards a tie-up with other parties in the Opposition. He also has good relations with Mulayam Singh Yadav, Akhilesh Yadav, and with leaders across parties.
For all his faults, Yadav, with his ear to the ground, is also a superb communicator, endowed with sharp political reflexes. It was he who first seized on the comments made by Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh chief Mohan Bhagwat when he spoke against reservations during the Bihar poll campaign in 2015. Yadav’s swift response to Bhagwat’s words effectively converted it into a poll issue. More recently, it was also Yadav who put the BJP on the defensive by equating Hindu consolidation with a Brahminical order, and called for three of the four Shankaracharyas – leaders of four major Hindu monasteries in India – to be selected from the backward classes and Dalits.
Breaking the grand alliance before 2019 makes little sense for Kumar because the BJP cannot give him more than what he already has, were he, hypothetically speaking, to think of aligning with the saffron party. In 2019, Kumar will undoubtedly assess the situation, and the best course of action to take.
