The
high voltage assembly elections to the 5 state assemblies of UP, Uttarakhand, Punjab,
Goa & Manipur ended with emphatic victories for the BJP in UP &
Uttarakhand & for the Congress in Punjab; Goa & Manipur gave fractured
verdicts but with the Congress being the single largest party in each case touted
it as a 3:2 victory. They were ingloriously pipped to the post by the BJP which
in all likelihood would laugh away with an eventual 4:1 victory.
Lesson 1 for the Congress: Learn agility
& not take any victory for granted.
The
Congress argues that the precedent set by R Venkataraman in 1991 – of inviting
the single largest party to form the government - should be followed. Such a
position is repudiated by others who aver application of the same principle, in
1996, by Shankar Dayal Sharma, led to the BJP being voted out in 13 days. A pre
poll coalition with a majority or a post poll coalition that could bestow
stability should be invited, they argue. Incidentally, the latter principle was
followed in J&K (2002), Jharkhand (2005) & Delhi (2013).
Chastised
by the swift movements, the Congress approached the honourable Supreme Court with
a prayer to put on hold the appointment & swearing in of Manohar Parrikar as
Chief Minister, Goa; they also requested for a composite floor test to be
ordered only to be rebuked by the SC for not approaching the Governor first nor
submitting an affidavit of support by the non- Congress legislators as proof of
enjoying majority support. The Court balanced out its judgement by pre-poning
the floor test to Thu the 16th of Mar.
Lesson 2 for the Congress: Selective
application of precedents shall not help; a legal battle without diligent field
work would be futile.
Constitutional
Expert Subhash Kashyap argues that the governor instead of invoking article 164
should have applied article 175 instead; the end result would have been just
the same but it would have been constitutionally more prudent.
Lesson 1 for the BJP: Hasty grab of
power without paying attention to constitutional niceties would invite ridicule.
The
BJPs actions, perhaps, could pass the legal test but fail the moral one. Prabhakar Timple who resigned from the Presidentship
of the Goa Forwards Party in protest against his party deciding to support the
BJP govt. despite the mandate being against it was scathing in his criticism
calling it in an interview to rediff the “BJP Political Mafia raj”; he also
feels that post grabbing power the BJP would attempt to lure Congress
legislators & thereby break the party. He also feels that the
Dhavalikar brothers -- Sudin and Dipak of the Maharashtrawadi Gomantak Party -- have always
been with the party in power & they have been doing it since the last 20
years.
Lesson 2 for the BJP: Respect the peoples’ verdict
It
could be argued that the BJP was in power in Goa & being reduced to 13
members in a 40 member house is a sign of voter non- confidence; a similar
logic shall apply to the incumbent Congress which was reduced to 28 members in
a 60 member house in Manipur. Perhaps, neither of the parties was keen to respect
the mandates.
Post
the Bommai judgement in 1993, sanity, largely, was restored to polity with a decreased
use of article 356 & a greater respect for mandates. The BJP’s action in
Uttarakhand & Arunachal was a regression & the current actions would create
further schisms in the polity. It needs
no soothsayer to predict that the Congress would reciprocate similarly if &
when it rides back to power. Clearly, we are sowing the needs of a more rambunctious
democracy & that surely is not music to ones ears.
