The detention — even for a short period — on Saturday of former deputy chief minister M.K. Stalin by the police in Tamil Nadu appears to be calculated to announce a full-scale political assault on rivals DMK by the AIADMK government of J. Jayalalithaa.

That the new regime showed little hesitation in moving against the younger son and presumed political heir-apparent of DMK supremo and former chief minister M. Karunanidhi speaks of the AIADMK leader’s determination to take on the DMK right at the start of her term. Ms Jayalalithaa has evidently been emboldened by the sweep of her party’s win over the incumbent DMK in the recent Assembly election. She has doubtless also sought to take advantage of the deep-going schisms within the DMK. Some of these surfaced as recently as a few days ago when Mr Stalin’s supporters made a clamour for their leader being named successor to Mr Karunanidhi in a bid to undercut any claims to party leadership that M.K. Alagiri, Mr Stalin’s elder brother, may project. Of course, the police has already targeted the coterie around Mr Alagiri, which had run riot in the southern districts of Tamil Nadu.
Mr Karunanidhi has spoken of “political vendetta” after Saturday’s events, which included the arrest of a former DMK minister and an MLA in cases relating to land-grab. It is to be seen if this echoes with the public as time goes by. For now it appears that the allegedly widespread land-grabbing by DMK functionaries when the party was in power has come to haunt the party. Ms Jayalalithaa had made this a prominent issue in her election campaign. The perception that no property deal could be completed without the local DMK bigwig getting a cut, or being given the first choice of purchase, was thought to be a factor in the DMK’s electoral debacle.
Apparently, the police has been instructed not to act suo motu, but only on receiving complaints from members of the public in matters pertaining to allegations of land-grab. This may help Ms Jayalalithaa fend off charges of victimisation against the DMK. But the essential political signal emanating from her can just as well set the stage for street battles between rivals, which could mean testing times for the law and order machinery in the state. The ruling party would be well-advised to keep this in view and not to lose focus on the state’s development agenda, which the chief minister has spoken eloquently about.
The DMK has been pushed into the corner after its election defeat. Key members of the party’s first family and their entourage have been enmeshed in corruption-related cases and thrown into jail pending trial. The relationship between the DMK and the Congress, its UPA ally in power at the Centre, is under strain. In short, the party’s self-perception could be one of being under siege. In such circumstances, it may be tempted to act somewhat irresponsibly in seeking to assert itself in the public sphere, and to provoke disturbances over relatively minor matters even if its organisational structure suffers from fissures. These are standard tactics for political parties. But the party in power does not have the luxury to act in any manner other than what would be construed as responsible. If individuals in the DMK are to be proceeded against for acts of illegality when they held power, any steps taken against them must at all times conform to the demands of due process. This is a given in a democratic dispensation. It is known to be unwise to declare an open season against political foes, especially when they are down and out.