The events which occurred in Jharkhand from the declaration of election results till the night of 11 March was a misuse of constitutional office and flagrant attempt to subvert the law of the land. The drama unfolded with the controversial decision of the Governor, Syed Sibtey Razi, to invite Sibu Soren to form a government while his opponents, the NDA, was the largest pre poll alliance, short of four votes to claim a majority. The second stage was the righteous indignation displayed by the BJP-led NDA which later paraded its 36 legislators and 5 independents before the President, who summoned the Governor to New Delhi after their letters of support of the independents was ignored by the Governor. The third stage was the intervention of the Supreme Court directing the advancement of the vote of confidence to 11 March from 15 March to allay fears of horse trading. It thwarted the move of the Soren regime to nominate an Anglo-Indian member to gain advantage in the voting. What followed was mobocracy inside the State Assembly with the UPA members stalling the proceedings on the grounds that the protem speaker installed by them was not authorized to conduct a floor test, thereby committing contempt of court and stretching the limits of legislative autonomy.
The crisis is an omen of dangerous times, with the Congress Party acknowledged as the Grand Old Party of Indian politics, emerging as the worst subverter of democracy, party politics and propriety. The chain of events after the Manmohan Singh led UPA government came to power has witnessed the erosion of the 'divine values and rights' proclaimed by sycophants of the Congress, embedded in secularism, governance and federalism. It started with the move to reinvigorate the office of Governors by 'cleansing' it of individuals who were not adherents of the Congress ideology, and making it a tool to further the party's goals by manipulating the electoral mandate in Goa and Jharkhand.
This is not to hold a fig leaf for the illustrious opponents of the UPA regime, but to state that democracy cannot function by the mere presence of institutions but by respecting the space for diversity of opinion and ideas highlighted by the elections, especially by fractured mandates. Respect for democracy ideally implies recognition that non Congress parties have the same right to exist as the Congress in the political spectrum.
India's political history is replete with examples of attempts to centralize power by Congress in the states, by exercising control over state politics through the Governor where it was on a weak wicket. The major impetus to the politics of the late N T Rama Rao and other regional leaders was the issues of the Congress-led Central governments attempting to topple non Congress regimes in the states, and thus endangering federal democracy over the long run.
What Governor Sibtey Razi did could appear as political acumen to myopic Congressmen, who have justified any move adding strength to the UPA regime, under the garb of 'safeguarding' secularism. Political parties of all hues have contributed to this doctrine in India's political lexicon. The office of Governor has great sanctity, and he is seen as the defender of the Constitution in the federal units. Abuse of his office distorts the federal democracy and encourages regional movements to raise awkward issues confronted by various state governments.
The latest move to swear in the NDA government under Arjun Munda after the resignation of Sibu Soren, and belated attempts by the Central government to salvage its blemished public image has put a lid on the crisis. But the damage to federal norms and politics has been done. Questioning the limits of judicial intervention would appear fallacious and a diversionary tactic to raise the issue of alleged encroachment into the legislative domain, Arjun Munda sought judicial remedy. The Supreme Court's intervention was necessitated to calm the chaotic political environment created by the Governor and UPA.
Democracy should not be relegated to seer manipulation of numbers and subversion of the electoral mandates. Non adherence to conventions in case of unclear electoral verdicts would only project the office of Governors as the viceroys of the Central government.
Published on 16 March 2005, Institute of Peace and Conflict Studies.
URL: The crisis is an omen of dangerous times, with the Congress Party acknowledged as the Grand Old Party of Indian politics, emerging as the worst subverter of democracy, party politics and propriety. The chain of events after the Manmohan Singh led UPA government came to power has witnessed the erosion of the 'divine values and rights' proclaimed by sycophants of the Congress, embedded in secularism, governance and federalism. It started with the move to reinvigorate the office of Governors by 'cleansing' it of individuals who were not adherents of the Congress ideology, and making it a tool to further the party's goals by manipulating the electoral mandate in Goa and Jharkhand.
This is not to hold a fig leaf for the illustrious opponents of the UPA regime, but to state that democracy cannot function by the mere presence of institutions but by respecting the space for diversity of opinion and ideas highlighted by the elections, especially by fractured mandates. Respect for democracy ideally implies recognition that non Congress parties have the same right to exist as the Congress in the political spectrum.
India's political history is replete with examples of attempts to centralize power by Congress in the states, by exercising control over state politics through the Governor where it was on a weak wicket. The major impetus to the politics of the late N T Rama Rao and other regional leaders was the issues of the Congress-led Central governments attempting to topple non Congress regimes in the states, and thus endangering federal democracy over the long run.
What Governor Sibtey Razi did could appear as political acumen to myopic Congressmen, who have justified any move adding strength to the UPA regime, under the garb of 'safeguarding' secularism. Political parties of all hues have contributed to this doctrine in India's political lexicon. The office of Governor has great sanctity, and he is seen as the defender of the Constitution in the federal units. Abuse of his office distorts the federal democracy and encourages regional movements to raise awkward issues confronted by various state governments.
The latest move to swear in the NDA government under Arjun Munda after the resignation of Sibu Soren, and belated attempts by the Central government to salvage its blemished public image has put a lid on the crisis. But the damage to federal norms and politics has been done. Questioning the limits of judicial intervention would appear fallacious and a diversionary tactic to raise the issue of alleged encroachment into the legislative domain, Arjun Munda sought judicial remedy. The Supreme Court's intervention was necessitated to calm the chaotic political environment created by the Governor and UPA.
Democracy should not be relegated to seer manipulation of numbers and subversion of the electoral mandates. Non adherence to conventions in case of unclear electoral verdicts would only project the office of Governors as the viceroys of the Central government.
Published on 16 March 2005, Institute of Peace and Conflict Studies.
http://www.ipcs.org/comm_select.php?articleNo=1674
No comments:
Post a Comment