Is Punjab worse than Manipur that Governor threatens invoking Article 356 against Mann government? Ironic

 

Is Punjab worse than Manipur that Governor threatens invoking Article 356 against Mann government

Ground Zero

Jagtar Singh

Chandigarh: Punjab has been witnessing building up of tension between Governor Banwarilal Purohit and Chief Minister Bhagwant Mann for some months over what apparently seems to be governance issues.

This situation is unprecedented in case of Punjab but not in the context of role of governors in the states where the Bharatiya Janata Party is not in power.

The governors have been hyperactive only in the states where non-BJP parties are in power and the most glaring examples are that of West Bengal and Tamil Nadu nwhere the rulinf parties are not in tune with the BJP.

The office of the Governor is a colonial legacy and under the present constitutional system, it is nothing more than performing the role of the post office between the Centre and the State. The Raj Bhavans are more of superstructures putting burden on state exchequer.

However, this dimension is not under discussion here.

The issue is the continuing build up in Punjab between the two top authorities to the level that the Governor has threatened invocation of Article 356 under which the state government can be  dismissed.

Without going into allegations and counter-allegations from the two sides, the situation needs to be assessed under the parliamentary practices and democratic dimensions rather than going into technicalities.

Of course, the state government is required under Article 167 of the Constitution to provide every information sought by the Governor and this provision must be respected by the state government.

Under the parliamentary practice, the people who are qualified to vote elect a party into power and the representatives of that party thus elected by the people elect the chief minister who constitutes his/her council of ministers.

As such, the chief minister is first accountable to the MLAs that have elected him, then to the party that he represents and then the people at large of that state. Thus, the mandate of the people is with the chief minister.

The governor, on the other hand, is nominee of the President of India technically and appointed on the recommendation of the government at the Centre. Governor, as such, is not accountable to the people of that state. Moreover, the governor can be shifted from one state to another.

This is the basic dimension of the relationship between the governor and the chief minister.

The basic issue is that of accountability to the people at large.

It is the chief minister and his party that has to face the next election and in case the government fails to come up to the mandate, the people have the right to reject that dispensation and replace it with  another party.

The sovereignty to take the final decision thus is vested in the people.

Now coming to the present tussle being witnessed in Punjab in the context of technicalities and general trend in the country.

Such confrontation between the chief minister and the governor is being witnessed in the states where the non-BJP parties are in power and at the political level, these parties are not on the side of the ruling BJP in the national political matrix.

The classic examples are West Bengal and Tamil Nadu.

The governors in both these states are known to be hyper active against the ruling party.

Punjab is the third such state.

The situation in Delhi is different as it is a semi-state and the confrontation is directly between the centre and the government of the semi-state. Of course, the mandate of the people there is also with the elected government but Delhi is treated as a special case being the national capital.

Punjab Chief Minister Bhagwant Mann today asserted that he had replied to several of the letters written by the Governor.

Punjab is strategically the most sensitive region in India and has been witness to  more than a decade long bloody turmoil that not only took the life of about 40,000 people but also of Prime Minister Indira Gandhi, Chief Minister Beant Singh and former army chief General (Retd) A S Vaidya who was army chief during Operation Bluestar, code name of army attack on the Golden Temple (Darbar Sahib) in June 1984. This was the only struggle in the country since 1947 that has such ramifications.

Going by the governments both at the Centre and in Punjab, the Khalistanis continue to be active.

The tension between the chief minister and the governor can’t be treated in isolation from the interplay of the political forces at the broader level although the radical stream has no linkage to such inter-play of forces.

The issue is as to how come the situation has taken this turn provoking the governor to threaten the state government. The Governor yesterday warned of invoking Article 356 of the Constitution and this is extreme.

Has the situation something to do with build up to 2024?

The issue is not just 13 Lok Sabha seats in Punjab and one seat of Chandigarh that is union territory.

It is the signal from Punjab that has always been very important. It is in this context that the Punjab turmoil has been recalled here.

It is the signal from Punjab that has the potential to dictate even the national political discourse and at this level, this state is different from Jammu and Kashmir that has been reduced to union territory.

The show down must be avoided.

The chief Minister is accountable to the people and the Governor to the Centre and both these offices should work within their respective boundaries to diffuse tension.

Last but not the least.

Is BJP ruled Manipur normal?

Is Punjab is worst than Manipur?

This calls for answer.