The CPI(M) has taken a jab at the opposition UDF, criticizing them for not addressing the controversy surrounding Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan’s daughter in the Assembly. This happened a day after the UDF faced criticism for not bringing up the issue. The CPI(M) suggested that the UDF refrained from discussing the matter due to concerns about Chief Minister Vijayan’s response.
The Marxist party firmly defended Vijayan’s daughter, T Veena, stating that her IT firm’s financial dealings were transparent and within legal bounds. A senior leader of the Communist Party of India (Marxist), A K Balan, emphasized that the allegations of money laundering regarding her transactions with a private minerals company were baseless since all transactions occurred through banks.
Balan defended Veena, explaining that her IT firm’s dealings with Cochin Minerals and Rutile Limited (CMRL) were in line with their contract. He questioned the Congress’s decision not to raise the issue in the Assembly and criticized their hesitation. Balan mentioned that if the opposition truly wanted to address the matter, they could have done so through an adjournment motion.
Balan dismissed the Congress’s claim that technical issues prevented them from bringing up the corruption issue in the Assembly. He explained that had they formally submitted corruption charges in writing, the Speaker couldn’t have denied their request.
The controversy arose in Kerala due to financial transactions between a private minerals company and Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan’s daughter, T Veena, and her IT firm. The controversy intensified after a Malayalam newspaper reported that CMRL had paid Rs 1.72 crore to Veena’s IT firm between 2017 and 2020. The company allegedly had dealings with key figures from both the ruling CPI(M) and the opposition Congress-led UDF.
The issue led to a political dispute, with the BJP demanding answers from Chief Minister Vijayan and the Congress taking a milder stance. The Congress was criticized by the BJP for not addressing the issue during the ongoing Assembly session. The Leader of Opposition, V D Satheesan, responded that even if they had raised the issue through an adjournment motion, the CM wouldn’t have responded.
Nonetheless, the CPI(M) vehemently denied the allegations, asserting that Veena’s transactions were legitimate and conducted according to the contractual agreement between her IT firm and the minerals company.