Political
Diary
New Delhi, 8 June
2021
Governor: Centre’s
Chaprasi
NEED TO LAY DOWN NEW
RULES
By Poonam I Kaushish
Whoever
said different political strokes for different political folks was dead on.
Specially when it comes to the high Constitutional office of the Governor.
Wherein handpicked loyalists do whatever their mai baaps sitting on India’s Raj gaddi want. Governance, after all is one big nautanki which has rewritten the basic time-honoured rules of
authority and turned democracy on its head. Bend them, break them, who cares!
Alas,
the continuing acrimony since July
2019 being played out in West Bengal and Delhi between Governor
Jagdeep Dhankhar and Chief Minister Mamata’s TMC has once again brutally put
the Governor’s role under the microscope. In its
latest tirade it has accused Governor of appointing relatives as officers on
special duty in his personal staff. An allegation Dhankhar denies, instead
alleges it’s to divert attention from the “grim and alarming law and order
situation” in the State following
post-poll violence.
Asserted he, “I'd
like to know what the State Administration is doing? Violence is increasing and the State is
“plagued with rampant violence….and ego prevails over public service.” In
retaliation the TMC has demanded Dhankhar's dismissal to President Kovind stating
that the Governor is not satisfied being in the Raj Bhavan and is interested
more in politics. Modiji should field him in an election and make him a
Minister.”
Taking
another swipe Mamata wrote to Dhankhar asserting, “I had specifically advised you to refrain from surpassing the
Chief Minister and Ministers and communicating-dictating to officials in excess
of your power under the Constitution and directing them to attend before you….You
are ignoring this advice.” Replied
Dhankhar, “I am appalled that the Chief Minister should even be contemplating
that the Governor has to obtain orders of the Government.”
Certainly, this tu-tu-mein-mein
between two Constitutional posts is not the first or the last time. Call it déjà vu, either way Modi NDA’s is no
different from National Front VP Singh’s 1989, Vajpayee’s 1999 nor UPA’s
2004-14 all have used, misused and debased the gubernatorial office to further
their political agendas and got Governors to do at their bidding, ever ready to
destablise the State, if desired by New Delhi. Most have no qualms of
conscience in rubbishing it in personal or Party interest, overlooking the
Constitution’s letter and spirit.
Expectedly,
this new nadir has once again raised questions about a Governor’s role,
qualifications and his Constitutional obligations and duties. Raising a moot
point: Is he the Centre’s kathputli?
Or, the keeper of the people’s faith as the Constitutional head of a State.
Importantly, are there any rules to underscore some semblance, coherence and
uniformity in gubernatorial actions? A charter of directions and guidelines?
Sadly,
in a milieu dictated by opportunism and you-scratch-my-back-and-I-yours, all
are past master in manipulating tactics reducing Raj Bhavans as extensions of
their Party offices. Instances of Governors interpreting or ‘misinterpreting’
the rule book any way he wants, drawing his own conclusions based more often
than not, on delusions so that he and his mai-baaps
at the Centre could rule the roost are aplenty.
Consequently,
a gubernatorial post is no longer decided on whether a person is a man of
stature known for his integrity and objectivity, but whether he can be a
convenient tool of the Centre, a chamcha.
Specially in Opposition-ruled States where he runs the administration by proxy,
playing the I-spy-game: petty politricking, gross interference, open
partisanship at the Centre’s behest.
Sending
for files, summoning Ministers and bureaucrats. To hear, entice, provoke and
register the voice of dissent against the State Government to his political
patrons in Delhi. Bluntly, make life hell for the Chief Minister at every step
and use it as a springboard to return to active politics.
Predictably,
this has tossed out the ‘safety valve’ envisaged by the Constitution makers of
who should be appointed Governors, manner of their appointment and their role.
During Constituent Assembly debates leaders hoped that eminent individuals,
preferably not those directly involved with politics should be appointed to
this ‘exalted’ position.
Unsurprisingly,
like its erstwhile predecessor Congress, the BJP has turned the conventions of
a Governor always being a Governor on its Constitutional head whereby a Rajyapal
relinquishes office and returns to active politics. Instances are many:
Mizoram Governor K Rajasekharan quit for active politics in Kerala. Karnataka
ex-Chief Minister SM Krishna was appointed Maharashtra Governor and later
India’s Foreign Minister. Ditto Sushil Shinde who relinquished Maharashtra
Chief Ministership in November 2004 and was anointed Andhra Governor the same
day. Two years later he re-entered active politics and within hours was sworn
in as Cabinet Minister for Power and later Union Home Minister in 2012.
All
seem to have forgotten that a Governor’s true function 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 at the Centre and be in tune
with his own people.
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 the President.
As
noted by Sarkaria Commission and endorsed by the Supreme Court, the Governor’s
role is that of “a Constitutional sentinel and that of vital link between the
Union and the State…Being the holder of an independent Constitutional office,
the Governor is not a subordinate or subservient agent of the Union
Government.”
Pertinently,
the Commission 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”. But these lie buried.
What
next? Sadly, all lament the decline of the Governor office but continue to
misuse and abuse it for personal and Party ends. Not only does it generate bad
blood between Lilliputian politicians but in its wake denigrates the Constitution.
Governors
need to remember that democracy means respecting the Constitution and upholding
established conventions along-with realizing the essence of Constitutionalism
is restraint and not confrontation. Time to introspect whether persons with a
preference for extra-Constitutionalism and lack of restrain should be appointed
or continued as Governors.
West
Bengal is a lesson on the dangers of appointing political hatchet men to high
offices which calls for fairness, uprightness and adherence to Constitutional
values and conventions. Our leaders need to rise above politics and set healthy
and gracious conventions for high Constitutional offices if our democracy is to
be put back on rails. They need to revamp and restore a Governor’s old glory
and appoint neutral non-political Governors.
Clearly,
the Governor must not be reduced to being a who’s who to who? who? A glorified chaprasi! It is now imperative that
Prime Minister Modi who postulates the Constitution also practices what he
solemnly preaches. Remember, what matters are not men but institutions. One can
tit for an individual but not tat on the State!
----- INFA
(Copyright, India News & Feature
Alliance)
|