Why is the DMK Celebrating the SC's Stay on ED Probe in the TASMAC Case?
Click to start listening
Synopsis
The DMK rejoices as the Supreme Court halts the ED's investigation into the TASMAC case, seeing it as a vital validation of their position against perceived political oppression. Bharathi's statements underscore the party's commitment to defending its integrity amidst allegations, marking a critical moment in Tamil Nadu's political landscape.
Key Takeaways
- Supreme Court halts ED probe into TASMAC.
- DMK sees ruling as a victory against political oppression.
- R. S. Bharathi criticizes the ED for selective investigations.
- The ruling emphasizes the importance of federalism.
- Political reactions highlight tensions between Centre and states.
Chennai, May 22 (NationPress) The DMK expressed joy on Thursday following the Supreme Court's decision to put a halt to the Enforcement Directorate's (ED) investigation into the alleged TASMAC scandal, deeming it a significant affirmation of the party's stance.
While addressing reporters at the DMK headquarters, Anna Arivalayam, party organizing secretary R. S. Bharathi, stated, "The Supreme Court's ruling has unveiled the Centre's attempt to exploit the ED to tarnish the image of the Tamil Nadu government."
"The BJP is unable to accept the DMK's unbroken electoral success in Tamil Nadu. Hence, they resort to utilizing the ED to discredit our administration," Bharathi remarked.
Bharathi highlighted that approximately 44 First Information Reports (FIRs) had been lodged concerning TASMAC, the state-operated liquor distribution agency.
"However, only a select few FIRs were chosen by the ED for raids. This indicates that the intention was not to genuinely investigate, but to fabricate a negative image of the DMK," he explained.
In reference to the Supreme Court's comments, Bharathi asserted that the Apex Court had condemned the ED for operating like a "blackmailing organization" across various regions of the country.
"The court's ruling is not merely a reprieve for Tamil Nadu, but also sends a powerful message against the arbitrary practices of the ED," he emphasized.
He further claimed that the judgment serves as a legal affirmation of the DMK government's position and its legal efforts to counter the ED's excesses.
"The court has delivered a substantial blow to the ED's politically driven actions. This is a notable victory for federalism and democracy," Bharathi stated.
The Supreme Court, earlier today, had suspended the ED's investigation into alleged money laundering related to TASMAC, questioning the agency’s jurisdiction and intentions.
This ruling has ignited significant political responses, with the DMK framing it as a victory against "authoritarian meddling" by the Centre.
Point of View
This decision by the Supreme Court highlights the ongoing tensions between state and central authorities in India. The DMK's assertions regarding political motivations behind the ED's actions reflect a broader concern about the use of federal agencies to target political opponents. It is crucial to maintain an unbiased view of such developments, ensuring that both accountability and fairness are upheld.
NationPress
08/06/2025
Frequently Asked Questions
What did the Supreme Court decide regarding the ED's investigation?
The Supreme Court stayed the Enforcement Directorate's investigation into the alleged TASMAC scam, questioning the agency's jurisdiction and motivations.
What is the DMK's stance on the ED's actions?
The DMK views the ED's actions as politically motivated and an attempt by the Centre to undermine the Tamil Nadu government.
How many FIRs were filed related to TASMAC?
About 44 First Information Reports (FIRs) were filed concerning TASMAC, but only a few were utilized by the ED for investigations.
What does the DMK claim about the Supreme Court's ruling?
The DMK claims the Supreme Court's ruling is a significant endorsement of their position and a blow against the politically motivated actions of the ED.
What are the broader implications of this ruling?
The ruling is seen as a reinforcement of federalism and a message against arbitrary actions by federal agencies in state politics.
