Murder of democracy seed was sown in 1959, now it is a weed immune to SCs clean-up

The BJP-led Centres ridiculous midnight shenanigans through a pliant governor in BS Koshyari to prevent the Shiv Sena-NCP-Congress alliance from forming government in Maharashtra failed, thanks to CJI SA Bobdes prompt action to list their petition and an expeditious direction for floor test by a Supreme Court bench led by Justice NV Ramana.
A “murder of democracy” was prevented. It exposed the hollowness of BJPs almost proprietorial claim over the political moral high ground. Congress protested the loudest and rightly berated BJP for the mess. But it was a Congress government headed by Jawaharlal Nehru which misused the power under Article 356 of the Constitution to sow the “murder of democracy” seed in Kerala in 1959.
The seed has grown into a thick weed, chocking the ethical exercise of Article 356. The EMS Namboodiripad government in Kerala was guillotined in 1959 by the Centre at the behest of then governor B Ramakrishna Rao. Since then, it has been repeated umpteen times.
The most sinister one happened on August 15, 1984. The Indira Gandhi government, through governor Ram Lal, dismissed the TDP government in Andhra Pradesh headed by NT Rama Rao, when he was away in the US for coronary bypass surgery. On his return, Rao herded his MLAs and sent them to Bengaluru in luxury buses, a practice now adopted by many political parties. Then he went to the peoples court riding his Chaitanya Ratham.
Public outcry forced the Centre to reinstate NTR. The Janata Party government headed by SR Bommai was dismissed by Rajiv Gandhi on April 21, 1989, through governor Pendekanti Venkatasubbaiah, who rejected Bommais written request for test of strength in the assembly.
He moved the SC and its judgment has become the touchstone for testing the validity of Centres actions, through governor, to murder democracy. Prior to Bommai, the Centres might under Article 356 to ruthlessly dismiss non-Congress governments was taken as inevitable, attracting muffled criticism from political analysts, who in general leaned towards Congresss hereditary right to be in government. The Bommai judgment [1994(3) SCC 1] severely trunand it does not make the governor an employee or servant of the government of India,” the SC had said.
A persons political stripes seldom vanish. Governors, most of whom are politicians in the sunset of their careers but with unflinching loyalty towards the party in power, have never questioned the Centres instructions seeking recommendations for dismissal of state governments.
BR Ambedkar had reposed blind trust in constitutional morality of governors and presidents. A trust that made him brush aside Constituent Assembly members grave apprehensions about misuse of Article 356. He had said, “Proper thing we ought to expect is that such Articles (like 356) will never be called into operation and that they would remain a dead letter.
If at all they are brought into operation, I hope the President, who is endowed with these powers, will take proper precaution before actually suspending administration of the province.” Ironically, Ambedkar had also said that a good constitution could turn bad and a bad constitution could turn good, depending on the character and morality of people entrusted with its implementation. in Moscow. The decision was faxed to him in Moscow at 1.52 am on May 23.
The Presidents approval was faxed back at 3.50 am. The SC had criticised the manoeuvres of the Centre and the governor and had declared imposition of Presidents rule unconstitutional [Rameshwar Prasad case, 2006 (2) SCC 1]. The actions of Koshyari and the Modi government in Maharashtra mirror the dark deeds of the Manomohan Singh government and governor Buta Singh in Bihar in 2005.
That year, Jharkhand governor Syed Sibtey Razi, on the Centres instructions, installed JMM leader Shibu Soren as CM despite the NDA claiming support of 41 MLAs in the 80-member House. SC followed the Bommai judgment and ordered floor test. Soren lost. NDAs Arjun Munda became CM. In all these and many more instances, governors have always adopted a more loyal than the king approach despite a 40year-old SC judgment telling them to act independently [Hargovind Pant vs Dr Raghukul Tilak, 1979 (3) SCC 458]. “It is no doubt 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 cated gubernatorial discretion to recommend dismissal of state governments and lain down that floor test was the sole mechanism to determine who enjoyed majority support.
But the nine-judge ruling has not been able to curb the tendency of political parties in power to murder democracy. Two such brazen murders took place in 2005 in Bihar and Jharkhand under the UPA government led by Manmohan Singh. While arguing Maharashtras case, senior advocate and Congress leader AM Singhvi said “democracy is a game of numbers”, a reiteration of the 25-year-old Bommai judgment.
Yet, governments at the Centre continue to contemptuously disregard numbers and perpetrate murder of democracy. Through a midnight operation in 2005, the Centre aided by governor Buta Singh dissolved the Bihar assembly to prevent the NDA, which was on the brink of cobbling a majority in a hung House, from staking claim to form government. The governors May 22, 2005, report recommending dissolution of assembly was accepted by the Union cabinet at 11 pm. Then President APJ Abdul Kalam was away in Moscow. The decision was faxed to him in Moscow at 1.52 am on MayRead More – Source