The Bandit Queen may have been lying somewhat low of late. But, only after travelling the road from ravine royalty to socio-political respectability and, for quite a few, even the status of a celebrity. Phoolan Devi, MP, has shown not just how a criminal can cock a snook at the system, but can actually be coopted into it, or honourably rehabilitated in it without legal quibblings proving serious obstacles. What Veerappan is attempting is still more ambitious. He is seeking both gain and glory in return for a recognition of the law. And, without pretending really to represent anything more than his gang in a rain forest of the Western Ghats. The femme fatale of Uttar Pradesh, after all, made her way to screen-spread fame as a victim who achieved a victorious revenge, as a fighter against caste and gender violence. The moustached sandalwood smuggler and contraband ivory merchant (who shot his first tusker before teens) and his career in crime have spelt no such social message for anyone. At least not so far, though fresh revelations from publicists familiar with the making of the Phoolan myth cannot be ruled out. This, however, has not deterred him from setting down conditions for his surrender that make it sound like a special favour to the state. The terms are nothing but a testimony to the abysmal record of the governments of Tamil Nadu and Karnataka in responding to a terror, inflated by official inaction.It is an eloquent commentary on the state of affairs that the brigand is combining the offer of his surrender along with that of the release of nine officers kidnapped by his gang recently. And, the offer comes after years of a well-advertised offensive by the forces of the two states, complete with combing operations and announcements of attractive prices on the heads of Veerappan and his associates. It is, surely, not the terrain alone that has made any advance of law and order so impossible for so long. Not many have dismissed as idle the bandit's reported boast about having politicians and officials on his pay rolls, and not a few have seen a connection between the claim and the shameful record of the sheriffs of the two states against this utterly unconvincing Robin Hood. The response of the governments thus far to the offer, accompanied by an 11-point charter of demands, does not readily hold out prospects of a dramatic improvement in the record.Experience provides insufficient ground for hope that the reported preparedness of the M. Karunanidhi and J.H. Patel regimes to consider the demands, if not to concede all of them, shows only an anxiety to ensure the safety of the hostages. There should be little need, in fact, to argue the total unacceptability of the demands, especially as conditions from a criminal of Veerappan's category for elementary compliance with the law of the land. From his insistence on surrendering only before the President of India to his claim to the poachers' pile of ivory in his possession and his eager entreaty for an opportunity for Phoolan-like celluloid celebration, the entire charter is a mockery of the law. Even to consider any of it would amount to an abject surrender. Can anything be more disgraceful?
