Samaikyandhra Movement

Samaikya Andhra Movement or Samaikyandhra Udyamam (Telugu: సమైక్యాంధ్ర ఉద్యమము, English: United Andhra) is a political movement organized to keep the Indian state of Andhra Pradesh united, and to prevent the creation of Telangana state. ^{[1] [2][3]} The movement was spearheaded by Lagadapati Rajagopal, Member of Indian Parliament representing Vijayawada constituency. The Joint Action Committee of Samaikya Andhra was headed by JC Diwakar Reddy. The Samaikya Andhra movement is well supported by students from 14 universities from the Seemandhra region, led by Andhra University students.

Contents 1 Lack of support in Telangana 2 Support from NRIs 3 Sri Krishna Committee Report 4 8th Chapter of Sri Krishna committee Report 5 See also 6 References

Lack of support in Telangana

There is no active political support for this movement from any political parties in the Telangana region.^[4][5] Samaikya Andhra JAC did not organize any public event within Telangana. Chiranjeevi and Jagan Mohan Reddy who has openly supported this movement has faced trouble attending public events in Telangana region, in the form of attacks from groups favoring separate state for Telangana.^[6][7]

Support from NRIs

This movement has also received support from NRIs (only from Seema Andhra regions) settled abroad with AndhraPradeshNRI.org, a non-profit organization created to provide a platform to reflect the views of NRIs of Andhra Pradesh origin, organizing several events across the US to celebrate the AP formation day in November 2010.^[8] All the politicians attending these meetings belong to the Seema-Andhra region.

A group of Telangana NRIs protested at the events organized by Samaikya Andhra proponents.^[9] Telangana NRI organizations organized separate events supporting Telangana state formation which was attended by Telangana politicians from all parties.^[10][11]

Sri Krishna Committee Report

The five member committee headed by Justice B.N. Srikrishna has submitted its report in two volumes to the Home Ministry of India on 30 December 2010. The home Ministry has announced that it will once again hold talks with all the eight recognized political parties of Andhra Pradesh on January 6, 2011 and make the report public on the same day.^[12]

In an all party meeting on Jan 6, 2011, (which was boycotted by TRS, BJP and TDP), Home ministry made the 505-page Srikrishna committee report public. Section 9-3(page 440) of the report discusses 6 solutions.^[13][14]

1. Status quo. Committee Favours this option least.
2. Bifurcation of the State into Seemandhra and Telangana; with Hyderabad as a Union Territory and the two states developing their own capitals in due course. Committee found this option also not practicable.
3. Bifurcation of State into Rayala-Telangana and coastal Andhra regions with Hyderabad being an integral part of Rayala-Telangana. Committee believes that this option may not offer a resolution which would be acceptable to people of all three regions.
4. Bifurcation of Andhra Pradesh into Seemandhra and Telangana with enlarged Hyderabad Metropolis as a separate Union Territory. This Union Territory will have geographical linkage and contiguity via Nalgonda district in the south-east to district Guntur in coastal Andhra and via Mahboobnagar district in the south to Kurnool district in Rayalaseema. As such, while there are some positives of this option it may be difficult to reach a political consensus in making this solution acceptable to all. Particularly from Telangana, serious resistance and agitation on this issue could be expected.
5. Bifurcation of the State into Telangana and Seemandhra as per existing boundaries with Hyderabad as the capital of Telangana and Seemandhra to have a new capital. After taking into account all the pros and cons,the Committee did not think it to be the most preferred, but the second best option. Separation is recommended only in case it is unavoidable and if this decision can be reached amicably amongst all the three regions.
6. Keeping the State united by simultaneously providing certain definite Constitutional/Statutory measures for socio-economic development and political empowerment of Telangana region – creation of a statutorily empowered Telangana Regional Council. The Committee considers that unity is in the best interest of all the three regions of the state as internal partitions would not be conducive to providing sustainable solutions to the issues at hand.In this option, it is proposed to keep the state united and provide constitutional/statutory measures to address the core socio-economic concerns about development of Telangana region. This can be done through the establishment of a statutory and empowered Telangana Regional Council with adequate transfer of funds, functions and functionaries in keeping with the spirit of Gentlemen's Agreement of 1956.

The Political leaders and Student JAC's from all 14 universities of Seemandhra region welcomed SKC report. The report summary itself is victorious achievement to UAP movement. Most of the backwardness claims by Telangana separatist movement proved wrong by SKC report. The false accusation by Telangana separatists saying Seemandhra region looted Telangana is wrong and Telangana (excluding Hyderabad) proved to be more rapidly developed than other regions.^[15]

Telangana leaders say the best option from the Sri Krishna committee report is option 5, which calls for the formation of separate Telangana state with Hyderabad as its capital. They plan to pressure the Central government to zero in on option 5 as the only workable option.^{[16][17][18][19]}

Telangana JAC steering committee comprising experts [4][5], from different fields studied the Sri Krishna Committee report and came to the conclusion that the report was a " bunch of lies" ^[20] which of course are not considered by any political leaders or experts from Seema-Andhra and Hyderabad.^[21][22][23] However MIM party was disappointed because their demand of maintaining the status quo(Option 1) or bifurcate as Rayala-Telanagana (Option 3) is rejected by SKC.^[24]

Reputed economist and former Planning Commission member C.H. Hanumantha Rao said that the Srikrishna Committee's recommendations are at variance with its own analysis. He said why the committee did not study the reasons for the failures of earlier protections, and how future protections will do justice to Telangana. He also said, that even while the committee's own analysis and data supports the formation of an independent Telangana, it only recommended this as the second-best option.^[25]

8th Chapter of Sri Krishna committee Report

In January, a petition was filed pleading to declare the Committee Report as 'invalid' since it did not make public the contents of the eighth chapter of its report, which deals with the law and order situation. The Attorney General of India arguing the case said that the Report was only a committee submitting its advice and the Union government was not obliged to act on its recommendation.^[26][27] The central government submitted that the contents would not be made public since it was a privileged document under Sections 123 and 124 of the Indian Evidence Act of 1872.^[28] On 17 February, the justice hearing this case said "Its surprising to see a report produced by a retired Supreme court Justice to have so many lies and half truths. Do we need to spend 400 million to get this kind of report? Even a politician won't be able to give such a wasteful and useless report."^[29][30][31]

On 23 March, Justice L Narasimha Reddy of Andhra Pradesh high court ordered central government to make contents of 8th chapter of Sri Krishna Committee, so called 'secret report'. Justice in his 60 page judgement said "The Committee travelled beyond the terms of reference in its endeavour to persuade the Union of India not to accede to the demand for Telangana". SKC secret report as quoted in paras 68-72, argued against Telangana state while discussing communal violence, Maoist violence and social tensions. The judgement (in para 75, 80 94) also quoted the SKC report's 8th chapter which advised central govt on how to manage Telangana political parties, how to manage Telangana public opinion using local media virtually owned by Seema-Andhra industrialists and what kind of law and order methods to be used. The supplementary note to secret report has three parts, ..

• "a) Political management: Action also needs to be initiated for softening the TRS to the extent possible .. Inputs indicate that this agitation can be tackled if Congress Leaders do not give an impression indicating any covert / overt support to it. Hence the Congress MPs / MLAs need to be taken into confidence and asked not to lend any form of support to the agitation. The Congress High Command must sensitize its own MPs and MLAs and educate them about the wisdom for arriving at an acceptable and workable solution. With the ruling party and main opposition party (for Telangana demand) being brought on the same page, the support mechanisms have a higher probability of becoming successful."(para 75)

• "b) Media Management: ..Andhra Pradesh has got about 13 Electronic Channels and 5 major local Newspapers which are in the forefront of molding the public opinion. Except for two Channels (Raj News & hmtv), the rest of them are supporters of a united Andhra Pradesh. The equity holders of the channels except the above two and the entire Print Media are with the Seemandhra people. The main editors/resident and sub-editors, the Film world etc. are dominated by Seemandhra people. A coordinated action on their part has the potential of shaping the perception of the common man. ..In the Print Media all major Newspapers are owned by Seemandhra people and the Regional contents published by them play a vital role. .. The editorial opinions, the banner headlines, the Regional content, the District editions need to be managed .." (para 80). “The print media is hugely dependent on the Government for advertisement revenue and if carefully handled can be an effective tool to achieve this goal”. (para 91)

• c) Full preparedness: As under each of the options there is a high possibility of agitational backlash, notwithstanding the actions taken in advance as suggested in (a) and (b) above, an appropriate plan of deployment grid of police force (both Central and State) with full technical support needs to be immediately drawn up. ..The likely troubled spots (e.g. Osmania, Kakatiya, Krishna Devraya Universities etc.) and the trouble creators in the three regions must be identified in advance and suitable action plan prepared. In my discussions with Chief Secretary and DGP, the kind of equipment and weaponry to be used were also discussed and it was agreed that weaponry used should be such as not to cause fatal injuries, while at the same time effective enough to bring the agitationists quickly under control. ”(para 94)

Justice said (in para 96) "If the committee has suggested use of arsenal of lesser degree, it is not because there is any pity or sympathy towards the agitators. Obviously, it is to avoid the wrath of the human rights agencies". The justice further said(in para 103) "The maneuver suggested by the Committee in its secret supplementary note poses an open challenge, if not threat, to the very system of democracy. If the source of inputs that gave rise to this is the Government, it (the Government) owes an explanation to the citizens. If, on the other hand, the origin of inputs is elsewhere, the Government must move in the right earnest to pluck and eradicate such foul source and thereby prove its respect for, and confidence in, the democracy."^{[32] [33][34]} Telangana JAC and Telangana leaders from all political parties demanded prosecution of Sri Krishna Committee members.^[35][36]

See also

• Vishalandhra Movement
• Telangana Movement

References