MK likely to take up Parvathi Ammal’s plea

By G Saravanan,
Published in The New Indian Express on May 2, 2010:

CHENNAI: Chief Minister M Karunanidhi may take up the request of Parvathi Ammal, mother of slain LTTE chief V Prabhakaran during his two-day visit to New Delhi on May 2 and 3.

“I will come from Delhi with a good news,’’ Karunanidhi told a representative of a city-based human rights organisation who had handed over the letter of Parvathi Ammal to Karunanidhi in person on April 30.

Agni Subramaniam of Manitham told Express that the chief minister went through the two-page letter and assured positive action on Parvathi Ammal’s request.

Sources said the State government had already started preliminary works needed for facilitating Parvathi Ammal’s request to visit Chennai for treatment.

Asked how Manitham was involved in the process, Subramaniam said, “Since our organisation works in the field of human rights and had been appreciated by Lankan Tamils during Vanangaman Mercy Mission to Vanni issue, Parvathi Ammal’s representative approached us from Kuala Lumpur.”
However, Janata Party president Subramanian Swamy on Saturday cautioned the Tamil Nadu government on taking any attempt to permit Parvathi Ammal to enter India on the pretext of medical treatment.

“I will challenge it in the court if any such attempt is made as it will be against law,” he said in a statement.

Prabhakaran’s mother was deported in 2003 after full police inquiry of her and husband’s clandestine political activities in Tamil Nadu on behalf of the LTTE, Swamy said.
On the basis of the review, her visa was terminated.Since she has yet to condemn the assassination of Rajiv Gandhi, she has not yet reformed and hence not entitled to a reconsideration of her expulsion, he said.

“When the NDA government had wanted to permit the expelled LTTE ideologue Balasingham to come to India in 2002, I had taken this matter to the Madras High Court to point out that it would conflict with the POTA law.’’ Similarly, allowing Parvathi Ammal’s entry will conflict with the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, he added.