Political Diary
New Delhi, 21 March 2023
‘State’ Of Head
WHAT CONSTITUTIONAL NORMS?
By
Poonam I Kaushish
It’s a killer world and everything
topsy turvy! First there’s the Parliament logjam, a tussle between BJP and
Congress over Rahul’s “anti-national remarks of ‘democracy in danger,” in
Oxford. While Saffronites demand his apology, 16 Parties alongside Congress
yell for a JPC on Modi ‘friend’ industrialist Adani over the Hindenberg report.
Second, Gubernatorial actions are again in the eye of storm in Supreme Court.
The Court’s strong words “Governor
Koshyari’s actions in calling for a floor test resulted in fall of a
legitimately established and functioning Thackeray led Government. This raises
serious concerns regarding exercise of powers by the Governor….he should not
enter an area which precipitates Government’s fall….. This undermines democracy
and is sad spectacle for democracy,” while hearing the Shiv Sena split case with
Thackeray questioning the foundation of the Shinde Government as he with 15
rebels were disqualified at time of the trust vote.
This is just one thin edge of the
wedge. The Court is also hearing Telangana Government’s petition accusing
Governor Soundarajan of “sitting” on 7 Bills pending since September last,
thereby creating a “Constitutional impasse which is irregular and illegal.” Ideally,
Article 200 states, Governor could return Bills for reconsideration but once the
Houses reiterates them he could not withhold assent.
Earlier the Court in a Punjab Chief
Minister vs Governor case said, levels
of discourse should not degenerate into a “race to the bottom.” Both Rajasthan and West Bengal have passed
laws against gubernatorial interference in education. In Rajasthan, the
Governor has been facing allegations of appointing Vice-Chancellors with an RSS-BJP ideology in 7 of 8 universities,
6 of whom are from outside Rajasthan.
Less said the better on ex-Jharkhand
Governor Bais sitting on Election Commission’s opinion on Chief Minister
Soren’s disqualification over a mining contract for 6 months, prior to moving
to Maharashtra last month. Other friction points are Governor’s refusal to
convene Assembly sessions, university Vice Chancellor’s appointments etc.
Lamented a former Governor, “The
Centre is making a big blunder. This
type of narrow politics will harm the country. None has thought about its
long-term repercussions. Myopia has replaced a broader vision, leading to a
blinkered approach”, he added.
Undeniably, these incidents again
underscore the problem is sharply getting worse. Tamil Nadu, Kerala, Rajasthan, Chhattisgarh,
Delhi and West Bengal have all cried hoarse of slowing down or gubernatorial
meddling in State Government’s functioning.
Why blame Soundarajan, Bais or
Koshyari? Instances of Governors ‘misinterpreting’ the rule book, drawing his
own conclusions based more often than not, on delusions so that he and his
benefactors at the Centre could rule the roost are aplenty. Meghalaya 2008,
Karnataka 2007, Goa, Bihar and Jharkhand 2005. What to speak of 1971-81 during
which in all 27 State Governments were dismissed by mis-utilizing the
Governor’s office. By 1983 President’s Rule was imposed 70 times.
The Centre is also wary of States
where regional Parties are ruling with wafer-thin majorities, leading to
political instability. The Governor is often used as a lever, facilitator and
at worst, a proxy of the Centre’s nefarious designs to install its own Government,
at any cost thus bringing the post into severe disrepute.
Today, unfortunately, the prism of
time has distorted the role a Governor plays. Sadly our leaders have
collectively quietly buried Constituent Assembly debates which crafted a
neutral and sanguine role for a Governor who was supposed to be the
Constitutional watchdog. Said Ambedkar, “The Governor has no functions which he
can discharge by himself at all….he is bound to accept the advice of the
Ministry.”
However, politics overshadowed the
gubernatorial post. The first row was in 1952 in Madras. Governor Sri Prakasa’s was accused of acting
inappropriately when he invited C Rajagopalachari to form the Congress
Government despite not fighting polls and elected as MLA. After that,
manipulations and machinations took place regularly.
What’s new? Various Congress, Janata
Dal, United Front, NDA regimes since the
1970s have eroded gubernatorial impartiality without outwardly violating the
letter of the Constitution. Trust them to find a lacuna and brazenly and
blatantly exploit it. By merrily taking advantage of the “silence” of our
Constitution framers.
Undoubtedly, the Governor has got
multiple discretionary powers but his unrestricted power to forming the
Government is the most important and controversial one. After the 42nd
Constitutional Amendment Act, Ministerial advice was made binding on the
President, but not on the Governor which has led to unseating of
democratically-elected Governments..
As things stand today, the Governor
is a political appointee and due to real
politik demands his allegiance to the Party at the Centre is over-arching.
The post is seen as a perfect lollypop for political castaways, parting gifts
for subservient bureaucrats and convenient posts for inconvenient rivals,
totaling over 60% today. His essential criteria: whether he can be a chamcha .Consequently, the Governor has become a convenient tool of
the Centre specially in Opposition-ruled States where he runs the
administration by proxy.
Clearly, none of this is conducive
to healthy democracy. For too long, Governor’s have been perceived to be
following the Centre’s writ, whichever be the Party in the Centre. One way to
stem the spiral of ruinous clashes is to urgently review appointments and
removal of Governors.
A good Governor can do a great deal
of good and a great deal of mischief if he is a bad Governor, in spite of very
little power given to him under the Constitution.
Two, Governors must be accountable
to not just the Centre but also the State and Rajya Sabha. House of Elders could
also screen prospective candidates who should be interrogated, investigated and
judged on suitability before confirmation. The President too should not just
act on the aid and advice of his Council of Ministers but could lay down
guidelines wherein he is not misled about a person’s political affiliations and
politics and only those citizens appointed who are politically neutral.
To curtail the
Governor from playing politics in the Chief Ministerial stakes, the National
Commission to Review the Working of the Constitution headed by Justice
Venkatachaliah, advocated significant changes. It wanted the Chief Minister to
be directly elected by the Assembly to obviate the need to test majorities in
the Raj Bhawan. The Commission was of the opinion that this would combat the
growing menace of horse-trading (sic.).
Pertinently, the Sarkaria Commission
and Justice Punchhi report noted the Governor’s role was that of “a
Constitutional sentinel and vital link between the Union and the State…Being
the holder of an independent Constitutional office, the Governor was not a
subordinate or subservient agent of the Union Government.”
He should be eminent in some walk of
life, a person from outside the State, be detached and not intimately connected
with local politics of the State and a person who has not participated in
politics generally, particularly in the recent past. It also suggested he be
appointed in consultation with the State Chief Minister. This was endorsed by
the Supreme Court.
Certain amendments need to be made
to streamline the position of Governor, improve the quality of incumbents and
provide dignity to this august office. Given the growth of regional Parties,
some of which lack a national perspective and remain embedded in parochialism
and identity politics, makes the case for good democratic Governors all the
more compelling. What gives? ---- INFA
(Copyright, India News and Feature
Alliance)
|