Political Diary
New Delhi, 21 June 2014
Governor’s Scam
CONSTITUTIONAL NORMS, MR MODI?
By Poonam I Kaushish
Even as Delhi was wilting in the blistering loo,
another kind of hot air was blowing through the corridors of power. As part of
a continuing farcical drama playing out to perfection, Prime Minister Modi new
Government is busy over-hauling Constitutional bodies, whereby those occupying posts like the Governor,
Chairpersons of the National Commission for Women, National Commission for
ST/SCs, NDMA et al have been asked to quit. No matter, it exposes a culpable
facet of our rulers’ democratic temper!
Call it déjà vu or Et tu NDA, either
which way Modi’s 2014 is not National Front VP Singh’s 1989, neither NDA
Vajpayee’s 1999 nor UPA Manmohan Singh’s 2004 who got Governors appointed by
their predecessors to resign. Succinctly, it is problematic. What with some of
the nine Governors --- Kerala’s Sheila Dikshit, Maharashtra’s Sankarnarayana
and West Bengal’s Narayanan digging their heels and refusing to vacate their
Raj Bhavans.
All resting their case on a 2010
Supreme Court ruling which laid down that a change of Government at the Centre
was not a ground to remove Governors, even if they were out of sync with the
policies and political ideologies of the Party in power. The order was in
response to a PIL filed by a BJP MP who had challenged the removal of the
Governors of UP, Gujarat, Haryana and Goa by
the UPA in 2004.
That Modi means business was
apparent when the Government made clear it intends using the on-going CBI probe
into the Augusta Westland VVIP helicopter pay-off deal which implicates Goa’s B V Wanchu and Narayanan (ex-SPG and NSA chiefs
respectively) to get them to quit or be removed by the President as the
investigating agency is waiting to question them
In fact, already the Centre has
asked Maharashtra Governor Satyanarayanan to desist from nominating MLCs to the
Legislative Council. Resulting in an ugly face-off between the BJP and
Congress. Pertinently, in the worst case scenario an ugly and protracted legal
battle could ensue if even one of the Governors decides to move court.
Ironically, Modi’s tit-for-tat
policy doesn’t square with what his Party elders A B Vaypayee and L K Advani
had said when the UPA sacked NDA appointed Governors, terming it as a “big blow
to democracy and a dangerous practice.” Two Union Ministers for Finance Arun
Jaitley and Urban Development Venkaiah Naidu had also called the move ““a gross
Constitutional impropriety” and “anti-democratic.”
Notably, this has once again opened
the constitutional Pandora’s box on the role of the Governor, his
qualifications and his Constitutional obligations and duties. Raising a moot
point: Are Governor’s the Centre’s chaprasis? Or, are they the keepers of the
people’s faith as the Constitutional head of their respective States. Are
ideologies to be the touchstones for matters of this Constitutional nature?
Would not this weaken the federal structure of the country?
Alas, the prism of time has
distorted the role a Governor has to play wherein today this high
Constitutional office has been unabashedly politicized turning him into a
kathputli of the Centre who acts as a pawn of his political mai baaps in Delhi. Overlooking the
letter and spirit of the Constitution and its framers.
Instances are aplenty. Circa 2008:
Meghalaya, Circa 2007: Karnataka, Circa 2005: Goa, Bihar
and Jharkhand. The common denominator? 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.
Moreover, it has become the perfect
lollypop for political castaways, parting gifts for subservient bureaucrats and
convenient posts for inconvenient rivals. The essential criteria for a
Governor’s selection is no longer whether he is a man of stature and known for
his integrity and objectivity, but whether the man can be a yes-man, a chamcha.
In fact, petty politicking, gross
interference, open partisanship and vision of personal grandeur are
increasingly becoming the routine attributes of the Governors. Raj Bhavan
postings have come to be seen as the best way out for the Ministers under a
cloud. We have examples of power-brokers being appointed Governors and their
returning to active politics after a gubernatorial stint. Former Union Home
Minister Shinde was Andhra Governor earlier as was ex-Foreign Minister SM
Krishna of Maharashtra.
Sadly, over 60 per cent of the
present lot of Governors are active politicians and the rest ‘pliable’
bureaucrats, police officers and Army Generals. Ever ready to function as the
Centre’s lackey and destabilise the State ship. By playing the I-spy
game---petty politicking, gross interference, open partisanship at the Centre’s
behest. Even, using a minor law and order problem to the Centre’s political
advantage to impose Central rule in the State. Bluntly, make life hell for the
Chief Minister.
Tragically, all lament the decline
of the Governor’s institution but continue to exploit the office and play merry
hell with elected Governments, be it NDA, UPA,
NF etc. A classic case of the pot calling the kettle
black!
Top experts affirm that the basic
role of the Governor is not just to represent the Centre but, as the head of
the State, to serve his people and fight their battles with the Centre, not
vice versa. He has to bear in mind the overall national interest, not partisan
Party interests.
The Constitution empowers him to
influence the decisions of an elected Government by giving him the right “to be
consulted, to warn and encourage” His role is overwhelmingly that of a “friend,
philosopher and guide” to his Council of Ministers with unrivalled discretion.
A lot more than those of India’s
President.
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
had also made two weighty recommendations. One, the Governor should be
appointed in consultation with the Chief Minister of the State. Two, his tenure
of five years should not be disturbed, except in rare circumstances for
“extremely compelling reasons”. Basing
it on the premise, of the Governor being a “Constitutional sentinel and vital
link between the Union and State, not a
subordinate or subservient agent of the Union Government”.
What next? Clearly, the Governor’s
office has to be revamped and restored to its old glory with assured tenures.
It is the time to rise above politics, appoint neutral Governors and men of
eminence not jee husoors who could distance themselves from the eternal battle
of Party politics.
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! 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)
|