NEW DELHI: Refuting the existence of the ginger group G-23, senior Congress leader and former Maharashtra Chief Minister Pritviraj Chavan said that Shashi Tharoor’s decision to contest for the post of Congress president was a unilateral one and he hadn’t consulted the leaders before joining the race. Speaking to this paper, Chavan said, “After Tharoor made up his mind, he could have called up and discussed with us. We may have explored possibilities. If Tharoor had consulted us, I don’t know whether we would have accepted it or not. What we would have done is a different matter,” said Chavan.
Chavan and Tharoor are among the leaders who were part of the ginger group known as G-23, who wrote to the Congress leadership demanding sweeping reforms in the party two years back. As the picture of Congress presidential election became clearer on Friday with Lok Sabha MP Tharoor and veteran leader Mallikarjun Kharge emerging as main contenders, the most surprising move came from G-23 leaders, including Manish Tewari and Chavan who endorsed Kharge, who is widely seen as the official candidate.
Explaining his reasons for backing Kharge, Chavan said that a group of leaders including him, in a late night meeting on Thursday, decided that if the party put up a solid candidate, they would endorse him. “Kharge is a senior leader with a long and credible electoral track record. Kharge and I have worked closely together. There is no question of contesting for the sake of politics or opposing for the sake of opposing,” he said, adding that after Kharge’s candidature was decided, the leader requested for support over phone.
Chavan also said that after Rajasthan Chief Minister Ashok Gehlot opted out of the race, the leadership considered Mukul Wasnik, but he chose not to contest. “We were happy to endorse Gehlot or Wasnik, but they chose to opt out,” he said.
Responding to Tharoor’s comments that ‘Kharge is a candidate of continuity’, Chavan said that Gandhi family is an asset to the party and it’s within their right to become part of the consultative process or the members of the working committee. “Rahul Gandhi is trying to mobilise the party in his own way. He was always welcome to contest the election. If he contests, then he is morally obligated to become a full time president, ” he said.
When pointed out about the arguments that Kharge is a loyalist of the Gandhi family and the High Command’s dominance will prevail despite the election, Chavan said, “How could you presuppose that the election is in the best interests of the party?”
Many leaders, including Tewari, have demanded a “free and fair’ electoral process and have written to Congress Central Election Authority Chairman Madhusutan Mistry on the same. Talking about transparency in the election process, Chavan said that it’s unfair to draw conclusions before the election process is concluded. “Let’s not forget that elections are being held after 22 years by casting ballots. There should be proper selection of the AICC members from among the delegates. After the Congress president is elected, there should be election of the Working Committee, as it happened 22 years back. Why should we say that it cannot happen or it cannot be decentralised?” asked Chavan.
He also expressed hope that Tharoor wouldn’t opt out of the race. “Tharoor made a very important point that there is a democracy in the party. Why should we even try to see that there should be unanimous selection? Tharoor may actually get more votes than many people think,” he said. Chavan also said that G-23 was a figment of imagination of the media and the group of leaders were vilified by a section for seeking reforms.
“Two years back, when we wrote a letter , the main demand was that the Congress should have a full time President and there should be an election for the post of President. Mrs Gandhi called us for a meeting after four months and discussed the issues threadbare. She accepted all our demands and I have thanked her for that,” he said.