Dissatisfied with AAP chief Arvind Kejriwal’s reply on mixing poison in the Yamuna, the Election Commission on Thursday sought another detailed response from him, saying his remarks prima facie appeared to promote disharmony and enmity between different groups. The Commission has said Kejriwal’s responses have been “completely silent” in substantiating his claim of Haryana “poisoning” the Yamuna river. The EC asked Kejriwal what kind of poison was mixed by Haryana, what was the supporting evidence about the quantity, nature and manner of detecting poison and the location where and the method of detection of the poison.
In a sharp response to EC’s directives for seeking factual evidence by 11 am on Friday to substantiate his claim of the Yamuna water being “poisoned” by the Haryana government, AAP chief said Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) Rajiv Kumar is acting as the BJP stooge. Accusing him of seeking a post-retirement job, Kejriwal said he would send three bottles of Yamuna water to Kumar and his Election Commissioners and challenged him to drink the water. Addressing a press conference , Kejriwal alleged that Kumar had “destroyed” the credibility of the Election Commission (EC) and was eyeing a post-retirement position.
“The language he has used is not the Election Commission’s job. He should contest the election from any seat in Delhi. We will send three bottles to Rajiv Kumar as well. I know they will arrest me in three days, let them do so, I am not afraid,” he said.
Kejriwal’s remarks came hours after the Election Commission shot off another letter to the AAP chief, in which it has stated that Kejriwal’s responses have been “completely silent” in substantiating his claim of Haryana “poisoning” the Yamuna river.
The poll body has sought “pointed replies” to five questions, failing which it will take an appropriate decision without further reference to him. The Commission posed five questions, asking: “What kind of poison was mixed by the state government of Haryana in Yamuna? Supporting evidence about the quantity, nature, and manner of detecting the poison, the location where it was detected, which DJB engineers detected it, and how and where.”
The EC also reminded Kejriwal, as a prominent public figure and former chief minister, of the “dire consequences” such statements could have, potentially leaving “permanent scars” between identifiable groups in Haryana and Delhi.
“Coming back to your response on your statement under reference, Commission has prima facie found your allegations about poising of river Yamuna as promoting disharmony and enmity between different groups, and overall public disorder and unrest even by the most sober interpretation,” the Commission says in its letter.
The poll panel also warned warned the former Delhi chief minister that his statements could harm relations between residents of Haryana and Delhi, causing lasting division. “As a prominent public figure and a former chief minister, the Commission need not remind you of the dire consequences that such utterances and actions of yours can have and leave permanent scars between well identifiable groups of residents of two States and /or living together in State of Haryana and NCT of Delhi,” the poll panel has written
The EC’s letter noted that during a campaign, Kejriwal alleged that Haryana was “poisoning” the Yamuna river to cause “genocide” in Delhi, which was allegedly detected and stopped by Delhi Jal Board engineers. The commission pointed out that instead of clarifying the “factual and legal matrix” of his statement, Kejriwal chose to justify it by referencing the high ammonia content in the river, a matter being addressed separately.
The EC, however, acknowledged that it “agrees with the contention that availability of sufficient and clean water is a governance issue” and emphasised that all concerned governments should work to secure it for everyone.
The commission added: “The commission finds no reason for anyone to dispute this noble position,” and stated it would leave the matter to the “competence and good discretion” of the governments and agencies, refraining from intervening during the election period on water-sharing or pollution issues with long-standing and future implications, where Supreme Court and national green tribunal (NGT) directions are involved.