Police in Tamil Nadu have reportedly attempted to suppress the release of a political survey predicting a significant victory for Annamalai, a BJP candidate, in the upcoming polls. This move has been viewed as another instance of the DMK’s intolerance towards criticism, further highlighting the party’s reputation for stifling dissent and free speech.
The DMK, known for accusing the BJP and Prime Minister Modi of fascist tendencies, has faced criticism for its alleged crackdown on social media dissent against its leadership. Additionally, there have been reports of the police targeting BJP candidates, particularly Annamalai, who is seen as a strong contender in the elections. Annamalai was recently booked for a poll code violation, and police have conducted searches on BJP candidates’ premises, citing suspicions of storing money and gifts.
Furthermore, TN Police have sent summons to Tirunelveli candidate and BJP MLA Nainar Nagendran after the seizure of Rs 4 crore from individuals in Chennai last week. This increased scrutiny of BJP candidates and allies has raised concerns about fair electoral practices and political impartiality.
In a bizarre incident, an 81-year-old fortune teller and his brother were arrested in Cuddalore district for predicting a victory for a PMK candidate using parrot astrology, known as “Kili Josiyam.” This ancient practice involves trained parrots selecting cards with predictions and pictures of gods, which are then interpreted by the astrologer. The arrests have sparked debate over the enforcement of wildlife protection laws, as the practice involves keeping parrots in captivity.
Meanwhile, in Chidambaram, workers affiliated with the Sangh Parivar were reportedly attacked by members of the VCK, highlighting tensions between political factions in the region.
On April 15, 2024, the Indian Political Democratic Strategies (IPDS), an organisation known for conducting political and election surveys, found itself embroiled in controversy as it attempted to release a survey result for the Coimbatore Lok Sabha constituency. IPDS, composed of alumni from Loyola College and established in 2004, has released numerous surveys on electoral opinion polls over the years, totaling around 46–48.
Listen to this ! Despite severe opposition, this survey is now out in the public . pic.twitter.com/2JDZGKaHPl
— karthik gopinath (@karthikgnath) April 15, 2024
The organisation had arranged a press meet at the Coimbatore Press Club to unveil the survey findings, just before the Election Commission’s deadline of April 16, 2024. However, their plans were thwarted when IPDS CEO C Prabhakar and Thirunavukkarasu were confronted by the police and prevented from releasing the poll survey.
In a viral video capturing the incident, Thirunavukkarasu is seen engaged in a heated discussion with a woman wearing a burkha, accompanied by a lady police officer. The woman questioned whether IPDS had obtained permission from the Election Commission to release the survey results, to which Thirunavukkarasu responded defiantly, questioning the democratic principles at play.
Thirunavukkarasu argued that other media outlets, such as the local Tamil daily Dinamalar, had been allowed to publish their content despite the election code of conduct. He expressed frustration at being treated unfairly and emphasised the importance of truth in democracy. Thirunavukkarasu lamented being forced to release the survey results on the roadside, highlighting the challenges faced by IPDS in fulfilling its mandate.
திருட்டு திமுக தோல்வி பயத்தில் தனது காவல்துறையை வைத்து, தங்களது சர்வே முடிவுகளை வெளியிட வந்த IPDS நிறுவன ஆட்களை மிரட்டுகிறது…!!
இது தான் ஜனநாயகமா? 😠
கோவையில் அண்ணன் @annamalai_k அவர்கள் குறைந்த பட்சம் 1 லட்சம் வாக்குகள் வித்தியாசத்தில் வெற்றி பெறுவார்… இல்லை என்றால் தனது… pic.twitter.com/Vsgn1aYizT
— நாட்டாமை ⚖️(WarRoom Commander 😎 ) (@Agmarksanghi) April 15, 2024
Asserting the organisation’s commitment to transparency and democratic principles, Thirunavukkarasu underscored IPDS’s formation with the backing of Loyola College and its dedication to providing accurate and unbiased information to the public.
CEO C Prabhakar, expressing frustration and defiance, accused the police of unlawfully preventing the release of their survey findings.
Prabhakar boldly challenged the police’s actions, asserting that the Election Commission had permitted the release of surveys until April 16, 2024. Highlighting the significance of the Coimbatore LS constituency, Prabhakar revealed that their survey, conducted over ten days with 3,281 participants from various demographics, predicted a closely contested battle. According to IPDS’s findings, BJP’s Annamalai led with 38.9%, followed by Ganapathy Rajkumar with 33.4 per cent, while the AIADMK secured 18.5 per cent of the votes.
Venting his frustration, Prabhakar denounced the police’s actions as dictatorial and unprecedented, noting that IPDS had never faced such opposition in its 20-year history. He issued a bold challenge, vowing to shut down the organisation if their survey results were proven incorrect, reaffirming his confidence in Annamalai’s victory in Coimbatore. Despite facing pressure and harassment, Prabhakar maintained that IPDS remained impartial and unaffiliated with any political party.
Prabhakar emphasised IPDS’s track record of accurately predicting election outcomes, including the victories of the DMK in previous elections. He questioned the need for politicising their survey results, expressing anguish over the unprecedented challenges faced by the organisation.
The controversy surrounding IPDS’s survey release intensified as other media outlets published conflicting predictions. While Dinamalar’s survey favoured the DMK, Polimer TV’s survey projected a significant lead for Annamalai. These conflicting reports added fuel to the fire, raising questions about the credibility of the survey findings and the underlying motives behind the police’s actions.
The incident underscored the broader challenges faced by organisations involved in political surveys and the increasing politicisation of electoral processes. It reignited debates about freedom of speech and expression, as well as the role of law enforcement in safeguarding democratic principles.
Comments