Protests on in TN, nod sought for Jallikattu

Protests and rallies by supporters and organisers of Jallikattu were held for the third day today in several parts of Tamil Nadu seeking a nod for conduct of the bull-taming sport.
The People's Welfare Front (PWF), which is coordinated by MDMK leader Vaiko, announced that it would observe a fast on January 17 over the issue.
Protests were held in many places, including Chennai, Madurai and Tiruchirappalli. 'All India Samathuva Makkal Katchi' cadres staged a demonstration in Chennai.
In Madurai, rallies were taken out seeking permission to hold the sport and protests were also held. Jallikattu is hugely popular in villages like Alanganallur and Palamedu in Madurai district.

Sporting black headbands and holding black flags, participants in the rally held placards seeking a nod for continuing the age-old traditional sport.
Many youngsters tonsured their heads today as a mark of protest against the ban. Youngsters and supporters of the sport also observed a fast.

Political parties demanded action from the state and central governments to facilitate the sport.
"A hunger strike will be held in Madurai on January 17 against the state, central governments which failed to take proper steps to vacate the stay on conducting Jallikattu," Coordinator of PWF and MDMK chief, Vaiko said here in a release.

Tamil Nadu Congress Committee chief EVKS Elangovan blamed both the state and central governments for the present ban on holding Jallikattu.
PMK chief Ramadoss said, The "central, state governments should hold discussion and promulgate an ordinance that will be valid." Going a step ahead, he said, "The governments which fail to do will be taught a never-forgettable lesson by the people."
After the Supreme Court stayed a notification of the central government allowing Jallikattu, Chief Minister J Jayalalithaa urged Prime Minister Narendra Modi to go in for an ordinance to facilitate the sport.
However, Union Minister Nirmala Sitharaman yesterday had said the central government could not promulgate an ordinance as the matter was pending in court and suggested that the state government may do it.