The Hindu : U.P.: Centre's role dubious

Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Friday, Mar 07, 2003

Opinion

Opinion - News Analysis

U.P.: Centre's role dubious

By Kuldip Nayar

There can be two opinions on whether or not the Rajya Sabha should have suspended question hour to accommodate a discussion on Uttar Pradesh. But there can be no doubt about the dubious role which the BJP-led Government at the Centre has played to rescue the Chief Minister, Mayawati, from the mess created in the wake of the no-confidence motion in Lucknow. The Prime Minister, Atal Behari Vajpayee, sat impassively in the House, watching the commotion over the issue. He walked out after half an hour. He represents the Union, which is duty-bound to intervene when the constitutional obligations are not carried out in any part of the country.

The issue was simple: the no-confidence motion against the Mayawati Government should have been voted upon instead of being put to voice vote. The Government's claim to a majority had been challenged. Members present in the House had to give their decision. It could not have been done through voice vote. There should have been a proper division where the votes for or against should have been counted. Obviously, Ms. Mayawati and her BJP supporters did not have the requisite numbers. They thought it fit to have a voice vote and then to do away with the Assembly for the next six months. Even this time, the session was held after a lapse of six months. (The constitutional requirement is that an Assembly has to have its sitting once in six months.)

New Delhi can say that the Constitutional requirement was met because the Assembly did meet and vote on the motion. But this was merely going through the motions. The strength of the Mayawati Government was never tested. The BJP, which wants her support because of Dalit votes, can congratulate itself for sustaining her in power — but at what expense? It was murder of democracy in daylight. Such instances put a question mark over the institutions in the country. If, for political reasons, the BJP can do something like what happened in Uttar Pradesh today, some other party, when it comes to power at the Centre, will do something uglier tomorrow. What is the recourse if the Governor does not intervene as has happened in Uttar Pradesh? Of course, he has not done so because he has been a BJP leader. But the institution is bigger than an individual or the party.

It is sad that the BJP, which fought against such excesses during the Emergency, is now a willing party to anything illegal if it helps it to stay in power. Ultimately, the remedy is the court. But how sensitive are MLAs and MPs when a High Court or the Supreme Court intervenes in matters, which they believe, lie in their domain? I recall many instances when standing committees of Parliament criticised what they considered an obiter dicta by the judges.

The dilution of democracy is unfortunate. But what can be done when political parties do not rise above their petty gains? I think the Prime Minister should have rung up Ms. Mayawati immediately after watching the proceedings in the Rajya Sabha and asked her to face the no-confidence motion on the floor of the House. He should have made it clear to her that a voice-vote may meet the technical requirements but not the constitutional or moral. Both he and the BJP then would have gone up in the esteem of the public. But such things are difficult to expect when political gains have priority over the country's prestige or the Constitution's supremacy.

Printer friendly page
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Opinion

Stories in this Section

Digging up the past

Public-private partnership for infrastructure

Protecting the bureaucracy

India's Afghan policy

Order on excavation: more questions than answers

U.P.: Centre's role dubious