Disqualification of 20 AAP MLAs is actually a case of BJP’s profit for office
The president of India, Ram Nath Kovind, on Sunday, gave consent to Election Commission of India’s (ECI) assertion that 20 MLAs of the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP)-led state government in Delhi had, apparently, in violation of established legal norms, occupied an “office-of-profit” while discharging duties as parliamentary secretaries and, thus, were liable for disqualification.
AAP has challenged this assertion in the courts but as things stand today, the strength of the party is reduced to 46 out of 50 in a Legislative Assembly of 70 members, and Delhi might be looking at bypolls on these 20 seats in the immediate future.
At various places, constitutional experts, legal luminaries and political analysts have gone into the gory details of the speciousness of the ECI’s order and have shown that this case has more to do with political vendetta and abuse of constitutional institutions rather than any legal infirmities on AAP’s part.
This brings us to an important flashpoint in Indian democracy — the perennial Centre-state conflict. This tussle between BJP at the Centre and AAP in the state follows in a long and infamous series of Centre-state conflicts which have impaired the sine qua non principle of democracy — separation of powers. The 7th Schedule of the Indian Constitution lays out, in sufficient detail, the subjects which come under the purview of the Centre, the state and both the Centre and state jointly.
This framework worked reasonably well from 1952 to 1967, barring the shameful Namboodiripad episode during which the Congress ruled both at the Centre and in a majority of states. However, soon after Nehru’s death in 1964, things started falling apart; Congress ceded ground to newer regional satraps in states while maintaining a dominion over the central government, and this led to partisan interference by Congress in a bid to hold sway over states it no longer had control over.
Centre-state relations were most adversely affected during the regime of Indira Gandhi, the authoritarian and autocratic leader of the Congress, who is, on a separate note, also a role model for our present right wing, nationalist and broad-chested prime minister.
To fully appreciate the political conflicts at the heart of the present Centre-state tussle, it is instructive to look at some infamous cases that have left an indelible imprint on the hallowed ramparts of India’s democracy:
1. Ram Lal versus NT Rama Rao
In 1984, the conspicuously named governor of Andhra Pradesh, Ram Lal dissolved the state government led by popular yesteryear film star, NT Rama Rao (NTR) of the Telugu Desam Party.
The coup d’état machinations were old. NTR’s party colleague, Bhaskar Rao, quit the government along with a few fellow colleagues and staked claim to form the government on grounds that NTR had lost majority in the state. NTR, despite submitting a long list of 163 MLAs who still supported him and gave him majority in the 294-seat Legislative Assembly, was not heard by the governor and Bhaskar Rao was appointed as the chief minister. All this was done at the behest of Prime Minister Indira Gandhi who saw in NTR a charismatic rival leader.
A month-long drama unfolded, wherein multiple political parties coalesced on a common platform to pick up cudgels against Indira Gandhi, and soon NTR was reinstated and Bhaskar Rao consigned to oblivion.
2. Romesh Bhandari versus Kalyan Singh
On a balmy evening in 1998, in the wee hours of the day, Uttar Pradesh (UP) governor Romesh Bhandari summarily dismissed the then state government of UP, led by Kalyan Singh of the BJP, to install in its place a government led by Jagdambika Pal of the now defunct Loktantrik Congress.
An overnight political development was necessitated when Pal and his coalition partners withdrew support for Singh’s government and Bhandari, dispensing with all constitutional norms, dismissed Singh’s government without a floor test. The Allahabad High Court intervened soon enough, and ordered for the status quo ante to be restored, which was followed by Singh proving his majority in the Assembly. Bhandari lost considerable face and came under criticism for acting out of political prejudices and not impartiality which his office demanded. It was apparent that this political fracas was remotely engineered by the powerful Congress party in a bid to dent BJP’s prospects in the impending Lok Sabha elections.
3. Arunachal Pradesh crisis
In 2016, a full-blown constitutional crisis, remotely controlled by BJP from the Centre, was underway in Congress-ruled Arunachal Pradesh. A regime change was led by Congress legislator Kalikho Pul and deputy speaker of the Legislative Assembly to remove the ruling dispensation of chief minister Nabam Tuki and install a BJP government.
With governor JP Rajkhowa’s consent, the rebels led by Pul passed a resolution anointing Pul as the chief minister of the state. Soon enough, the Supreme Court reversed this decision, re-instated Tuki and came down heavily on Rajkhowa, terming his actions illegal, unconstitutional and politically influenced.
4. Democracy hacked
When Indira Gandhi precipitated the illegal dismissal of the first United Front Government in Bengal in 1967, or when the Karunanidhi government in Tamil Nadu was dismissed by Chandra Shekhar under pressure from the Congress or when the BJP tried to engineer fissures in Uttarakhand to unseat Congress’ Harish Rawat.
But none of these cases are a match for the political persecution and malice inflicted upon AAP by the BJP-led central government since 2015. Be it registering false cases against 13 AAP MLAs, taking away the Anti-Corruption Branch and the Services department from Delhi government, appointing a super-quango to bring the work of the government to a virtual standstill or simply delaying important, marquee projects of the state government, Modi and BJP have left no stone unturned to trouble and potentially dismiss the state government in Delhi.
When nothing worked, in May 2017, after the results of the MCD polls, BJP tried to engineer a coup d’état in AAP, through disgruntled elements of the party. And now the bogey of parliamentary secretaries and office of profit.
Arvind Kejriwal has shown a formidable doughtiness in his politics. First, he has focused on creating a unique “AAP model of governance” - one which works on the principle that those who have less in life should have more in law. Delhi government’s achievements in the fields of education and health have already garnered acclaim from world over and its schemes of free water and electricity have made him the darling of Delhi’s working class. And second, he has proven to be a consummate politician, in that he is willing to take on the BJP’s coercive tactics, head-to-head, unlike the craven avatar of present-day Congress.
This tyrannical treatment of AAP by BJP would go down in the annals of history as a case of sour grapes, abuse of power and misuse of constitutional authority, unlike anything seen before. Perhaps this is the “New India” that our prime minister talks about? One where the term “co-operative federalism” is a mere witticism meant for pompous headlines.
Machiavelli, in his seminal treatise of power and politics, had remarked: "Ethics is a function of politics and not politics that of ethics". Alas, the BJP has successfully married the worst aspects of Machiavellian politics with the incompetence matched only by the vaudeville acrobatics of a totalitarian state. This is a truly unique Indian tragedy.
(Writer works with the Delhi government.)