Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Thursday, Jan 17, 2008
ePaper | Mobile/PDA Version
Google



Opinion
News: ePaper | Front Page | National | Tamil Nadu | Andhra Pradesh | Karnataka | Kerala | New Delhi | Other States | International | Opinion | Business | Sport | Miscellaneous | Engagements |
Advts:
Retail Plus | Classifieds | Jobs | Obituary |

Opinion - Letters to the Editor Printer Friendly Page   Send this Article to a Friend

Surprising

The Supreme Court’s decision to grant conditional permission to the Tamil Nadu government to allow jallikattu (taming the bull) is surprising. Not only animal activists but also other right-thinking folks from all walks of life heaved a sigh of relief when the court on Friday refused to vacate the stay on the Madras High Court ruling allowing jallikattu.

The judges must surely have had enough reasons to ban jallikattu in the first place. They knew even then that they were up against a huge demand for the conduct of the sport. Did the reasons suddenly disappear?

Sharada J. Schaffter,


Chennai

* * *

The Supreme Court’s order is amusing, given that jallikattu was banned only a few days ago. Did not the court anticipate an appeal while passing the earlier order? What is meant by proper conduct of the event? Should the bulls be told to behave and not charge ferociously at those who seek to torture them in the name of taming them? Are officials expected to act as third umpires?

S. Krishnakumar,


Chennai

* * *

The conditional permission has negated the court’s earlier order of a blanket ban. The latest order is a setback to all those who spoke on behalf of the hapless animals. It is not clear how getting prior permission, videographing the event, putting up double barricades and government supervision will help to prevent cruelty to animals and loss of life and limb to the participants.

J. Anantha Padmanabhan,


Srirangam

* * *

The conditions imposed by the apex court for the conduct of this mob-oriented event are unlikely to have any impact. The law-enforcement authorities will be helpless and remain mute spectators to the assemblage of innumerable people acting in riotous ways. It is a clear case of mobocracy winning over democracy.

It is unfortunate that the court admitted a modification petition on a Sunday and passed orders favouring the Tamil Nadu government, which actually did not represent the feelings of the millions opposed to the sport.

P.S. Subrahmanian,


Srirangam

* * *

Why are revision Benches constituted at the eleventh hour, even on holidays, to review months and years of work? And why are judgments revised overnight? Do not revised decisions render the earlier elaborate process a charade?

K. Chandrasekar,


Chennai

Printer friendly page  
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail



Opinion

News: ePaper | Front Page | National | Tamil Nadu | Andhra Pradesh | Karnataka | Kerala | New Delhi | Other States | International | Opinion | Business | Sport | Miscellaneous | Engagements |
Advts:
Retail Plus | Classifieds | Jobs | Obituary | Updates: Breaking News |


News Update


The Hindu Group: Home | About Us | Copyright | Archives | Contacts | Subscription
Group Sites: The Hindu | The Hindu ePaper | Business Line | Business Line ePaper | Sportstar | Frontline | Publications | eBooks | Images | Home |

Copyright © 2008, The Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of The Hindu