Political Diary
New Delhi, 19 July, 2016
BJP Loses Face In
Arunachal
GOVERNOR NOT A DOORMAT!
By Poonam I Kaushish
It’s a killer world and everything topsy turvy! First a
former American Afghan war veteran goes on a killing spree in Dallas
to avenge the death of his black brethren, then security forces shoot down
Hizbul Mujahedeen’s poster boy Burhan Wani leading to angry public protests, in
Nice, France the ISIS struck terror via a
truck mowing down 84 and injuring hundreds on Bastille Day.
Phew, democracy won as Turkey successfully nailed a
military coup and last but not least, the Modi Sarkar rewrote a Governor’s Constitutional norms and turned
democracy on its head, but lost out when the Supreme Court restored the
gubernatorial halo! So far so good.
The sordid tale is set in Arunachal Pradesh where the BJP
through its Governor Rajkhova preponed the Assembly session to mid-December to
test Nabam Tuki’s Government majority as 21 of Congress’s 47 MLAs had rebelled
and joined hands with 11 BJP legislators in the 60-member House. Tuki closed
the Assembly gates so rebel Congress-BJP MLAs held an extraordinary session in
a community hall and removed the Speaker who had disqualified 14 of the 21
legislators.
The Governor cited collapse of law and order and imposed
President’s rule. In February Congress rebel Kalikho Pul was anointed Chief
Minister after winning a trust vote in the Assembly. The Congress and Tuki
moved the Supreme Court which reinstated Tuki’s Government leaving the Governor
and BJP red faced.
In another dramatic turnaround the Congress replaced Tuki before
the trust vote in the Assembly with Pema Khandu and rebel-turned-Chief Minister
Pul returned to the Party fold with 30 dissident MLAs.
All’s well that ends well. Yet the happenings in Arunachal
have once again brutally exposed two highly reprehensible facets of our rulers’
democratic temper. At the political level, governance is shamelessly all about
cutting deals, side deals and underhand deals. At the Constitutional level, the
BJP finds itself in hot waters with the Supreme Court, twice over. Remember
Uttarakhand.
Undeniably the main takeaway of the Supreme Court judgment
was underscoring the Governor’s role and powers. Importantly, the five judges
Constitutional Bench downsized the gubernatorial discretionary powers under
Article 174.
It stated: “He must not embroil himself in any political
thicket... He must keep clear of any horse-trading, unsavoury political
manipulations, irrespective of the degree of their ethical repulsiveness. He
must remain aloof from discord, disharmony, discontent or dissention within
individuals and Parties.
“Who should or shouldn't be leader of a Party is a political
question to be... resolved by the Party itself. The Governor cannot make such
issues a matter of his Constitutional concern. He cannot have overriding
authority over representatives of the people.”
Further, the Apex court rejected Rajkhova’s justification
for advancing the Assembly session to take up a motion for the Speaker's
removal. “The participatory role of the Governor concerning the removal of a Speaker,
can neither be understood nor accepted, and is unwarranted.
Holding that the Governor wasn’t a guide or mentor to a Speaker,
it averred, that he cannot ask a Speaker to discharge his functions as he considers
Constitutionally appropriate as both have independent Constitutional
responsibilities.
Call it déjà vu or
Et tu NDA, either which way Modi
NDA’s is no different from National Front VP Singh’s 1989, Vajpayee’s 1999 nor
UPA’s 2004 who got Governors appointed by their predecessors to resign. Since
2014 nine Governors have resigned, Kerala’s Sheila Dikshit, Maharashtra’s
Sankarnarayana, W Bengal’s Narayanan, UP’s Joshi, Pudicherry’s Kataria, Goa’s Wanchoo,
Nagaland’s Ashwani Kumar, Chhattisgarh’s Shekhar Dutt, Mizoram’s Purushothaman
and Uttarakhand’s Paul.
Each Governor interpreting read misinterpreting the rule
book any which way he wanted, drawing his own conclusions based more often than
not on delusions as long as he and his benefactors at the Centre could rule the
roost.
Notably, the Supreme Court order has once again opened the Constitutional
Pandora’s box on the Governor’s role, his qualifications and Constitutional
obligations and duties. Raising a moot point: Is he the Centre’s chaprasis? Or, the keeper of people’s
faith as the Constitutional head of a State. Will ideologies be the touchstones
for matters of a Constitutional nature?
Alas, over the years the prism of time has distorted the Governor’s
role wherein today he has turned into the Centre’s kathputli who acts as a pawn of his political mai baaps in Delhi.
Thereby, overlooking the letter and spirit of the Constitution.
Sadly, in a milieu of you-scratch-my-back-and-I-yours, the
Governor has become a convenient tool of the Centre. Especially in
Opposition-ruled States where he runs the administration by proxy. Playing the
I-spy game, petty politricking, gross interference and open partisanship all at
the Centre’s behest. Sending for files, summoning Ministers and bureaucrats.
Bluntly, make life hell for the Chief Minister at every step
and use it as a springboard to return to active politics. What else can one
expect as over 60 per cent of the present lot of Governors are active politicians
and the rest ‘pliable’ bureaucrats, police officers and Army Generals. His
qualifications? Is he a ‘yes’ man?
Unfortunately, post judgment even as our polity laments the
decline of the crucial institution of Governor, yet given a little leeway will
continue to misuse and abuse the office for personal and Party ends. Not fir
them that it generates bad blood between Lilliputian politicians but in its
wake denigrates the Constitution and undermines India’s unity and integrity.
What next? With the Supreme Court lying down the parameters
will our netas heed? Top experts
affirm that the Governor’s basic role is not just to represent the Centre but,
as the Head of the State, serve his people and fight their battles with the
Centre, not vice versa.
His role is overwhelmingly that of a “friend, philosopher
and guide” to his Council of Ministers with unrivalled discretion. He has to
bear in mid the overall national interest, not partisan Party benefits. The
Constitution empowers him to influence the decisions of an elected Government
by giving him the right “to be consulted, to warn and encourage”
Clearly, Arunachal is a lesson on the dangers of appointing
political hatchet men to high offices. As long as the Centre continues to play
petty, partisan politics, India
will be greatly hurt. The Governor must not be reduced to the level of a
glorified chaprasi!
Needless to say, the office of the Governor desperately
needs to be revamped and restored to its old glory. This calls for fairness,
uprightness and adherence to Constitutional values and conventions. The time
has come to set healthy and gracious conventions for high Constitutional
offices if our democracy is to be put back on the rails.
Remember, what matters are not men but institutions. Towards
that end we need men of stature known for their integrity and objectivity. One
can tit for an individual but not tat on the State. Let us not convert the
Governor from being a who’s who to who? who?
We need to rise above politics and appoint neutral non-political
Governors. It is now imperative that a Prime Minister who postulates the
Constitution also practices what he solemnly preaches! ----- INFA
(Copyright,
India News and Feature Alliance)
|