Open Forum
New Delhi, 27 May 2015
Delhi Lt-G-CM Standoff
CLEAR LINE OF CONTROL VITAL
By Dr.S.Saraswathi
(Former Director, ICSSR, New
Delhi)
India’s Capital Delhi is in the
vicious grip of a tussle between the Lt-Governor and Chief Minister Kejriwal
over their roles, functions and respective jurisdictions with both flexing
their muscles. Clearly, smacking of shadow-boxing between Modi and Kejriwal.
The fracas started with the Delhi’s Lt Governor Jung
appointing a senior bureaucrat as Acting Chief Secretary without consulting the
Chief Minister last week. A livid Kejriwal refused to let accept this.
Resulting in Jung cancelling all appointments made by the Delhi Government in
the interim.
Adding fuel the Union Home Ministry notified
that the Lt-G would have jurisdiction over matters connected with services,
public order, police and land in the Capital. A provoked AAP Government convened
a special two-day session of the Delhi Assembly earlier this week and passed a
resolution nullifying the notification. Asserted Kejriwal, “the fight with the Centre
will continue” until full Statehood is accorded to Delhi.
Predictably, the matter reached the
High Court which described as “suspect” the ban placed by the Centre on Delhi Government’s
anti-corruption branch from taking action against officials in corruption
cases. The Court observed that the Lt-G
is bound to act on the “advice” of the Council of Ministers and respect the people’s
mandate.
Importantly, the issue is not the clash
between an elected authority and an appointed head or between two dominant personalities
as made out by some people, but the division of powers in governing the Capital
city.
Pertinently, Delhi has certain unique responsibilities not
found in other metropolitan cities. One, it is the seat of administration and Government
and has political and symbolic importance.
Two, it might not enjoy a dominant status in global urban networks or
commercial links, but holds tremendous importance as a nation’s seat of highest
decision-making power.
Three, it houses the country’s
Parliament, Union Government offices and Secretariat, largest number of
residing and floating population of political and administrative power holders,
foreign embassies etc. Though every place country-wide should be well governed,
policing, law and order, public amenities, transport and construction
activities in the Union Capital demand extraordinary attention.
In fact, administration of a capital
city globally has special features for performance of its additional
responsibilities. Safety of the Capital
city from internal and external enemies is sine
qua non for the safety of a nation.
In federal Governments, preserving the federal character in governance
of the Capital city is also important.
Remember, Delhi
became the country’s Capital in 1912 and until Independence, its administration was in the
hands of a Chief Commissioner. Under the Indian Constitution Part C States Act
1951, Delhi became a Part-C State. Under this provision a Legislative Assembly
and a Council of Ministers was constituted to aid and advise the Chief
Commissioner in the discharge of his functions.
However, the legislative powers of
Part C States were limited. In 1956
under States Reorganization, the Legislative Assembly and Council of Ministers
were abolished and Delhi became a Union Territory
under the direct administration of the President.
The post of Lt-Governor for Delhi and Delhi
Metropolitan Council were created in 1966 on the recommendations of the
Administrative Reforms Commission. The
Council had no legislative power but only an advisory role. In 1990, the Legislative Assembly was
restored with the Lt-G retaining his place.
Undeniably, the Delhi Government has
undergone many changes and still remains unsettled with multiple authorities and
overlapping responsibilities. Succinctly, a State with too many cooks spoiling
the broth!
Arguably, a Capital territory or
district in any country is normally designated as a separate administrative
division so that no State/province gets any special advantage in housing the “Capital”.
In Belgium, the Capital city is a full
federal unit. Bern, Switzerland’s
Capital is also the Capital of the Canton of Bern. Berlin,
Germany’s Capital has been
an independent city-State since Germany’s
unification in 1990. The French capital Paris is
located in a province and Brazil’s
Capital set within a federal district have no special status.
Ottawa, Canada’s Capital holds a special position
as the National Capital Region which represents a jurisdictional area and not
an administrative unit. It is governed
like a city. In many federal States, there
are Capital regions that do not have special significance as in Denmark.
The Australian Capital is a
self-governing territory called Australian Capital Territory (ACT). It has a Legislative Assembly and its own
Chief Minister. But, the Federal Parliament has the power to overrule ACT
legislations. The National Capital region in the US
is designed to provide superior support to the Federal Government in Washington DC.
Jakarta is both the national and regional Capital
of Indonesia. It is officially called
the Special Capital Region of Jakarta and is equal to a State or province. Islamabad, Pakistan’s
Capital and seat of Government is federally controlled though it historically
formed part of Punjab province.
Malaysia’s Capital Kuala Lumpur is the seat
of Parliament and official residence of the King. Due to overcrowding, the seat of Government
was shifted in 2001 to the planned city of Putrajaya which became the centre of Federal Administration
and came to be known as the Federal Capital.
Both these and Labuan have special
status as federal territories.
South
Africa is a unique case of three functioning capitals and no
defined national Capital. Cape Town is the legislative Capital where Parliament
sits; Pretoria is the seat of Government and Administration;
Bloemfontein is
the judicial Capital. Most embassies are in Pretoria
while the Constitutional Court
is in Johannesburg.
Indeed, the patterns are baffling
and confirm that controversies in the administration of the Capital city are
normal in all Federal countries.
Significantly, the three major
issues facing Capital city Delhi
--- services, public order and police and land use --- can in no sense be
regarded as local or regional matters.
They have nation-wide impact and cannot be left to the decisions of a
local or State Government wherein other States are not represented.
The issue is not about the relative status
of an elected leader and appointed head.
It is about the impact of Delhi Government decisions on the nation as a
whole for which the Union Government is responsible. Delhi is the Capital
of India
and not just for the region where it is located.
Political pundits must ponder over
the advisability of entrusting this to a local legislative body and its
executive, the power of taking and implementing decisions that have a bearing
on the entire country. The size of the
mandate is irrelevant here.
In sum, even if Delhi
is made a full fledged State, it is doubtful whether matters affecting India e.g.
Parliament and the Secretariat’s safety can be assigned to its exclusive
jurisdiction. Undoubtedly, Parties promised Statehood before elections without
seriously considering its implications.
The Capital city might require a
special body to deal with issues of national importance in which all States are
in some way represented. The alternative is to entrust such matters to the Union
government leaving the Delhi Government to manage all other issues. No grey
area should be allowed. ---- INFA
(Copyright,
India News and Feature Alliance)
|