Devendra Prasad Yadav, deputy leader of the Janata Dal, United, in the Lok Sabha, is not one to shy away from courting controversy. Earlier, the Member of Parliament from Jhanjharpur in Bihar did not hesitate to take on Rashtriya Janata Dal chief Laloo Prasad Yadav and left the party to join the JD-U. The two have been at loggerheads since.

More recently, he has criticised the government -- of which his party is a constituent -- on the Ayodhya dispute. Yadav is perceived to have forced Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee to summon the coordination committee of the National Democratic Alliance to discuss the issue.

In an interview with Tara Shankar Sahay, he spoke about the government's stance on Ayodhya and the Gujarat riots and emphasised that he and "like-minded entities" would distance themselves from the NDA if the situation demanded it. Excerpts:

Why did you speak out against the government in the Lok Sabha recently when your party is a notable constituent of the ruling alliance?

I objected to the kind of language used against me and Indian National Lok Dal member Sushil Indora by some Bharatiya Janata Party members. That is not how an MP should behave, especially inside the House. It indicated that these members were taking our support for granted. I brought it to the notice of the House and pointed out that we would not compromise on our commitment, and that the government has to run on the NDA agenda and not on what some BJP members are choosing to foist on us.

There is no question of any compromise on upholding secularism, which the NDA government is committed to uphold.

What exactly did these BJP members say?

Something to the effect that if we were not satisfied, we were free to leave the NDA.

What was your response?

I put these BJP members in their place. I told them we had been elected to the House not on their whims and fancies but on the support of the people who had sent us to Parliament as their representatives.

Is that all?

I think the House took notice of the legitimacy of what I said. If the NDA allies are agitated against some policies of the government, I think it is the duty of the government to sort out the problem. It is not surprising that the prime minister summoned the NDA coordination committee to find out why some allies were agitated.

Have the problems been sorted out?

Well, at least the NDA coordination committee meeting, chaired by Vajpayeeji, has given an undertaking that there will be more extensive and vigorous consultations among the partners on issues of national importance. That has justified what I had been saying in the Lok Sabha, that if the government deviates from the NDA's agreed agenda, including the preservation of the secular fabric, we will not keep quiet.

The national agenda does not include the construction of the temple or mosque in Ayodhya, neither does it have [the revocation of] Article 370 of the Constitution or the [implementation of a] common civil code.

Could you identify some of these BJP MPs?

They are identified with the Vishwa Hindu Parishad and the Bajrang Dal. These BJP MPs should have opened their cards when the NDA agenda of governance was being finalised. Now they cannot bypass the agreed agenda.

We had taken grave objection to the proposed asthi yatra that the VHP adherents were talking about because it would exacerbate an already tense communal situation. I am glad they [the VHP] have denied any moves to hold such a yatra.

There is this allegation that you are so vocal in criticising the government because you have been denied a ministerial berth.

(Angrily) Those who make such ridiculous allegations are ignorant about my political background. I began my career by resigning from my assembly seat in 1977 only three months after being elected. I reduced any chances of becoming a minister because of a political conviction then. That was the time Karpoori Thakur, our leader, was chief minister of Bihar. He was also a Lok Sabha member from Samastipur parliamentary constituency. At that time, we sacrificed our electoral achievements for the sake of democracy to which we adhered, unlike this power-hungry, rag-tag band of BJP MPs who want to implement the Hindutva agenda. Let me tell you that I don't want to be a part of this marghat sarkar (dead government).

Could you elaborate?

Listen, it is a question of political commitment, a submission to political ideals. Can these people dare to question our commitment? These half-baked Hindus, who don't even represent 2 per cent of the community, question the motives of secular MPs, of those who are liberal. These are the allegations of rabid and greedy communalists, not sane members who can also be found within the BJP.

What has been the role of your party chief Sharad Yadav in this entire controversy?

You must ask him. He is our national president and he has not stopped me in any way from raising this issue.

NDA convener George Fernandes said after the coordination committee meeting that your assertion in Lok Sabha should not be taken at face value because "people talk when they meet." Please comment.

He may be the NDA convener and Samata Party leader, but he should not forget that even his party members [Prabhunath Singh and Raghunath Jha] supported our contention on secularism and were against the conduct of some BJP MPs in the House.

Why is Fernandes silent even when the government is going beyond the agreed NDA agenda? He is the defence minister, so I won't say anything further. But he better be reconciled that whenever we feel that the government is deviating, we will raise our voice.

BJP MP Vinay Katiyar tried to misbehave by rudely gesticulating at us. That is unparliamentary. I told him he was not a contractor for all Hindus. I am a Hindu, not a hardliner but a liberal one. If Fernandes is blind to some BJP members' misconduct, I am not. He is the one who contributed towards the Socialist movement and raised the issue of the double membership of the BJP with the RSS and the VHP. In the past, he used to oppose these organisations, but today he is supporting them.

We practise what was taught to us by Dr [Ram Manohar] Lohia, our tongue is not double-forked.

What happened to the merger proposition wherein the JD-U, Samata Party and Lok Janshakti Party were to merge into one entity under the JD-U tag?

Here too, some of our leaders are playing a double game. While they have given the written consent for merger, they are not practising what they preach. They are the spin-doctors.

How do you see Prime Minister Vajpayee's role in this affair?

The prime minister as our country's constitutional head has appealed for peace and brotherhood during the Ayodhya and Gujarat crisis. He has said that his government will implement the court verdict on Ayodhya and also called for even-handed justice in Gujarat. But he is being hemmed in by these half-baked Hindus who claim that they will not abide by the court verdict on Ayodhya and neither will they listen to the prime minister.

I think his efforts are to go by the NDA agenda of governance and that is heartening. He condemned the attack on the Orissa assembly by VHP fanatics and emphasised that it was better to be dead than suffer the opprobrium from it since the former had shouted "Vajpayee zindabad" following the dastardly incident.

His intentions are transparent and he wants to uphold the constitutional, secular and parliamentary traditions of our country. But the bhoot pishacch [ghosts and evil spirits -- the VHP and Bajrang Dal] in his family seem determined to rock his boat. It is not us, the alliance partners.

How do you perceive Union Home Minister L K Advani's role?

He is discharging his role as the home minister, I think he is helping the prime minister.

Can one go away with the impression that the JD-U as an ally will not ditch the NDA government?

So long as it lives up to the NDA agenda of governance.

The Sabarmati in Flames: The complete coverage
The Ayodhya Dispute: The complete coverage

The Rediff Interviews