The one in Spain might be more famous the world over, but Tamil Nadu has its own bull-running tradition. It's called Jallikattu and it has been banned since 2014. That's when the Supreme Court of India upheld a central government notification that included bulls among the list of animals that cannot be used in traditional sports.

Jallikattu involves money being tied around a bull's horns before the animal is release into an enclosure, often full of men. A tamer then tries to catch the bull and ride it for a prescribed distance so he can win the prize. Before being sent out into the arena, though, the bulls are beaten, poked, twisted, bitten, have their ears cut off and are even force fed alcohol, to ensure they are in a mood to run around and put on a good show. It is this part of the tradition that the Supreme Court found brutal enough to uphold a ban on the tradition, no matter its roots in farming rituals.

Advertisement

As happened last year in the run-up to the Tamil festival of Pongal, when Jallikattu usually takes place, there have been renewed calls of late for the practice to once again be allowed. Last week, Tamil Nadu Chief Minister J Jayalalithaa wrote a letter to Prime Minister Narendra Modi asking for an executive ordinance that would allow the sport to be held.

In fact, Jayalalithaa's letter includes a request asking Modi to extend Parliament or hold a special session to discuss this issue, barring which an ordinance would do. Considering her state just underwent catastrophic flooding, the urgency displayed by the government in calling for executive action seems misguided at best if not blatantly opportunistic.

There even seems to be support from the Centre. Two union ministers have expressed support for the tradition and a number of other political parties have rallied around the cause of permitting it. It doesn't help the bulls causer that Tamil Nadu is on course to have state assembly elections in 2016.

Few are going to mention exactly why the Supreme Court felt the need to intervene last year: The government promised that it would carefully run the events in ways that reduce the torture of the animals, but a team that went on inspections found no such control, giving the court further reason to prohibit the tradition.