The seed of the Murder of Democracy was sown in 1959, now it is a weed immune to the cleanliness of SC

The ridiculous midnight pranks led by the BJP Center through a flexible governor at BS Koshyari to prevent the Shiv Sena-NCP-Congress alliance from forming a government in Maharashtra failed, thanks to the prompt action of CJI SA Bobde to enumerate his petition and an expedited address for the floor test by a Supreme Court bank run by Justice NV Ramana.

A murder of democracy was avoided. He exposed the void of the almost proprietary claim of BJP on the moral political ground. Congress protested against the noisiest and reprimanded BJP for the disaster. But it was a congressional government headed by Jawaharlal Nehru which misused the power of article 356 of the Constitution to sow the seed of the murder of democracy in Kerala in 1959.

The seed has become a thick weed, blocking the ethical exercise of article 356. The Namboodiripad EMS government in Kerala was guillotined in 1959 by the Center at the request of then governor B Ramakrishna Rao. Since then, it has been repeated countless times.

The most sinister occurred on August 15, 1984. The government of Indira Gandhi, through Governor Ram Lal, dismissed the TDP government in Andhra Pradesh headed by NT Rama Rao, when he was out in the United States for coronary bypass surgery. Upon his return, Rao drove his MLA and sent them to Bangalore in luxury buses, a practice now adopted by many political parties. Then he went to the popular court riding his Chaitanya Ratham.

The public protest forced the Center to restore NTR. The Janata Party government headed by SR Bommai was dismissed by Rajiv Gandhi on April 21, 1989, through Governor Pendekanti Venkatasubbaiah, who rejected Bommai's written request to prove force in the assembly.

He moved the SC and his trial has become the touchstone to prove the validity of the actions of the Center, through the governor, to assassinate democracy. Before Bommai, the power of the Center according to Article 356 to mercilessly dismiss governments that did not belong to Congress was considered inevitable, which attracted muffled criticism from political analysts, who generally leaned toward the hereditary right of Congress to be in government. The Bommai ruling [1994 (3) SCC 1] is severely truncated and does not make the governor an employee or servant of the government of India, ”said the SC.

The political stripes of a person rarely disappear. The governors, most of whom are politicians in the twilight of their careers, but with an unwavering loyalty to the ruling party, never questioned the instructions of the Center in search of recommendations for the dismissal of state governments.

BR Ambedkar had placed a blind confidence in the constitutional morale of the governors and presidents. A confidence that made him ignore the serious concerns of the members of the Constituent Assembly about the misuse of Article 356. He had said: The right thing we should expect is that such Articles (such as 356) will never be put into operation and continue Being a dead letter.

If they are put into operation, I hope that the president, endowed with these powers, will take appropriate precautions before suspending the administration of the province. ” Ironically, Ambedkar had also said that a good constitution could become bad and bad. the constitution could become good, depending on the character and morality of the people in charge of its implementation. in Moscow. The decision was faxed to Moscow at 1.52 in the morning of May 23.

The president's approval was faxed at 3.50 am. The SC had criticized the maneuvers of the Center and the governor and declared the imposition of the President's government unconstitutional [Rameshwar Prasad case, 2006 (2) SCC 1]. The actions of Koshyari and the Modi government in Maharashtra reflect the dark facts of the government and governor of Manomohan Singh, Buta Singh, in Bihar in 2005.

That year, the governor of Jharkhand, Syed Sibtey Razi, following the instructions of the Center, installed JMM leader Shibu Soren as CM despite the fact that the NDA claimed the support of 41 MLAs in the 80-member Chamber. SC followed Bommai's trial and ordered a floor test. Soren lost. Arjun Munda of NDA became CM. In all these and many more cases, governors have always taken a more loyal approach than the king despite a 40-year SC trial that tells them to act independently [Hargovind Pant vs. Dr Raghukul Tilak, 1979 (3) SCC 458]. It is undoubtedly true that the governor is appointed by the president, which means in effect and substance by the government of India, but that is only a mode of designation with governmental discretion recommended to recommend the dismissal of state governments and establish that evidence. of floor. 'It was the only mechanism to determine who enjoyed majority support.

But the ruling of nine judges has not been able to curb the tendency of political parties in power to assassinate democracy. Two of these blatant murders took place in 2005 in Bihar and Jharkhand under the UPA government led by Manmohan Singh. While discussing the case of Maharashtra, the main defender and leader of Congress AM Singhvi said that democracy is a numbers game, a reiteration of the 25-year Bommai ruling.

However, governments in the Center continue to despise the numbers and perpetrate the murder of democracy. Through a midnight operation in 2005, the Center, aided by Governor Buta Singh, dissolved the Bihar assembly to prevent the NDA, which was about to entangle a majority in a hanging House, claim to form a government. On May 22, 2005, the Union cabinet accepted the governor's report of May 22, 2005, which recommended the dissolution of the assembly. Then APJ President Abdul Kalam was out in Moscow. The decision was faxed to Moscow at 1.52 in the morning of May 23. The president's approval was returned by fax at 3.50 in the morning. The SC had criticized the maneuvers of the Center and the governor and declared the imposition of the President's government unconstitutional [Rameshwar Prasad case, 2006 (2) SCC 1].

The actions of Koshyari and the Modi government in Maharashtra reflect the dark facts of the government and governor of Manomohan Singh Buta Singh in Bihar in 2005. That year, Jharkhand governor Syed Sibtey Razi, following the Center's instructions, installed the leader from JMM, Shibu Soren, as CM despite the NDA claiming the support of 41 MLA in the 80-member House.

SC followed Bommai's trial and ordered a floor test. Soren lost. Arjun Munda of NDA became CM. In all these and many more cases, governors have always taken a more loyal approach than the king despite a 40-year SC trial that tells them to act independently [Hargovind Pant vs. Dr Raghukul Tilak, 1979 (3) SCC 458]. “It is certainly true that the governor is appointed by the president, which means in effect and substance by the government of India, but that is only a mode of appointment and does not make the governor an employee or servant of the government of India. , The SC had said. The political stripes of a person rarely disappear.

The governors, most of whom are politicians in the twilight of their careers, but with an unwavering loyalty to the ruling party, never questioned the instructions of the Center in search of recommendations for the dismissal of state governments. BR Ambedkar had placed a blind confidence in the constitutional morale of the governors and presidents. A confidence that made him ignore the serious concerns of the members of the Constituent Assembly about the misuse of Article 356.

He had said: The right thing we should expect is that such articles (such as 356) are never put into operation and that they remain a dead letter. If they are put into operation, I hope that the president, endowed with these powers, will take appropriate precautions before suspending the administration of the province. ” Ironically, Ambedkar had also said that a good constitution could become bad and bad. the constitution could become good, depending on the character and morality of the people in charge of its implementation.

comments