Rahul Gandhi as the Leader of the Opposition may not know. But 'our own' lone Naga MP in Lok Sabha - S Supogmeren Jamir will recall the manner the Vamuzo government was dismissed and President's Rule was imposed.
Hence waving a copy of the 'Constitution of India' is one thing and to do real soul searching about implementing and upholding it is another thing.
 |
| Late Vamuzo : A victim of 'act of perfidy' by Congress |
"This act of perfidy by the Congress government (of P V Narasimha Rao) has come at a time when, with the knowledge and approval of Delhi, I was engaged in an effort to persuade the underground insurgents in Nagaland to give up arms and join the political process," Vamuzo later wrote in a small booklet titled 'Subversion of Constitution of India in Nagaland' (published by Nagaland People's Council, 1992)
He also wrote: "After all, the Congress party, in power at the centre, has always treated the states as colonies".
In 2016 March, the state of Uttarakhand was placed under President’s Rule, within two months of the dismissal of the Arunachal Pradesh government on January 26.
Dismissing Harish Rawat’s regime in Dehradun under Article 356 of the Constitution appears to be yet another addition to the catalogue of constitutional sins committed by the centre and this time paradoxically it was under Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s government.
Of course then doing a story for IANS news agency I had written, "By doing so, Modi has followed the footsteps of the Congress reign while in power. Yet, he had promised a different kind of polity."
The provisions of the Article 356 – giving sweeping powers to the central government – are essentially aimed at restoring constitutional propriety after breakdown of governance in a state, Justice V R Krishna Iyer had once observed.
Settling partisan scores seems to be the norm.
Abuse of Article 356, though, is nothing new in Indian politics. A few BJP leaders have tried to build up an argument that the Congress had no business to talk about constitutional decorum as the grand old party had several times dismissed non-Congress governments across the country. In the context of 1992 and dismissal of the Vamuzo government, 'The Statesman' wrote in its editorial :
"The imposition of President's Rule in Nagaland revives all the fears of the misuse of Constitutional provisions by central governments bent on advancing party political advantage".
In 1992-93, the PV Narasimha Rao government at the Centre dismissed four BJP governments – in Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan and Himachal Pradesh following the demolition of Babri Masjid on 6 December.
In 2005, during Manmohan Singh’s regime, Goa Chief Minister Manohor Parrikar – now the Defence Minister – was dismissed by Governor SC Jamir.
Incidentally in 1990, Jamir, then Nagaland Chief Minister, was himself dismissed by Governor M M Thomas after 12 ruling Congress legislators defected from the Congress camp.
Needless to add, K L Chishi formed the government with the support of Congress defectors.
Like Rawat, Jamir had demanded trial of strength in the assembly and had managed the backing of the Speaker, late TN Ngullie. As many as 10 MLAs including incumbent Chief Minister Neiphiu Rio was disqualified. Only two Congress MLAs Cubatemjen Ao and T A Ngullie's membership remained intact as they were expelled from the party.
Chubatemjen became Chishi's Finance Minister replacing Tiameren under the Jamir government.
However, Governor M M Thomas, during the VP Singh regime at the Centre, did not summon the assembly and had even declined to meet two Congress observers, Rajesh Pilot and SS Ahluwalia, saying the views of Congress MPs were not required on a political situation in Nagaland.
Even a government led by hardcore socialist Chandrashekhar at the Centre was no different. In 1990, it dismissed the DMK ministry of M Karunanidhi in Tamil Nadu, despite lack of any adverse report from the state governor, to seek support from Rajiv Gandhi’s Congress which was wooing Karunanidhi’s rival, J Jayalalitha of the AIADMK.
Ironically, the Congress party in 2016 came at the receiving end of the imperial character of governance when the Uttarakhand government was dismissed.
In 2024, it is Congress MPs who are moving around with a copy of the Constitution
protesting the alleged “murder of democracy”.
'Nagaland Page' report
Abuse of Art 356 a big constitutional sin : Nagaland has been a victim
Former CM Vamuzo had published a booklet 'Subversion of Constitution of India'
New Delhi
"I like the dreams of the future better than the history of the past". - Thomas Jefferson, former US President.
Dismissing Congress leader Harish Rawat’s regime in Dehradun under Article 356 of the Constitution in 2016 by the Modi government was an addition to the catalogue of constitutional sins committed by the centre.
Of course by doing so, the Modi regime had followed the footsteps of the Congress reign while in power.
It was a throwback to Congress culture.
The provisions of the Article 356 – giving sweeping powers to the central government – are essentially aimed at restoring constitutional propriety after breakdown of governance in a state, Justice V R Krishna Iyer had once observed.
In the context of Nagaland in 1992 and dismissal of the Vamuzo government, 'The Statesman' wrote in its editorial :
"The imposition of President's Rule in Nagaland revives all the fears of the misuse of Constitutional provisions by central governments bent on advancing party political advantage".
Abuse of Article 356, though, is thus nothing new in Indian politics. A few BJP leaders
have from time to time tried to build up an argument that the Congress had no business to talk about
constitutional decorum as the grand old party had several times dismissed non-Congress
governments across the country.
The lone Naga MP in Lok Sabha - S Supogmeren Jamir will recall the manner the
Vamuzo government was dismissed and President's Rule was imposed.
Hence, analysts may say, waving a copy of the 'Constitution of India' is one thing and to do
real soul searching about implementing and upholding it is another.
"This act of perfidy by the Congress government (of P V Narasimha Rao) has come at a time when,
with the knowledge and approval of Delhi, I was engaged in an effort to persuade the underground
insurgents in Nagaland to give up arms and join the political process," Vamuzo later wrote in a small
booklet titled 'Subversion of Constitution of India in Nagaland' (published by Nagaland People's Council, 1992)
He also wrote: "After all, the Congress party, in power at the centre, has always treated the states as colonies".
Well, the BJP too followed the same track. In 2016 March, the state of Uttarakhand was placed under
President’s Rule, within two months of the dismissal of the Arunachal Pradesh government on January 26.
The Congress has not been able to bounce back in these two states since then. Of course in Arunachal Pradesh,
most BJP leaders including the likes of Chief Minister Pema Khandu and two Lok Sabha MPs Kiren Rijiju
and Tapir Gao are all from Congress stable.
In 1992-93, the P V Narasimha Rao government at the Centre dismissed four BJP governments –
in Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan and Himachal Pradesh following the demolition of
Babri Masjid on 6 December.
In 2005, during Manmohan Singh’s regime, Goa Chief Minister Manohor Parrikar – now deceased -
– was dismissed by Governor S C Jamir.
Incidentally in 1990, Jamir, then Nagaland Chief Minister, was himself dismissed by Governor M M Thomas after 12 ruling legislators defected from the Congress camp. M M Thomas has been the only Christian Governor in the state.
Needless to add, K L Chishi formed the government with the support of Congress defectors.
Like Rawat, Jamir had demanded a trial of strength in the assembly and had managed the backing of the Speaker, late T N Ngullie. As many as 10 MLAs including incumbent Chief Minister Neiphiu Rio were disqualified. Only two Congress MLAs Chubatemjen Ao and T A Ngullie's membership remained intact
as they were 'expelled' from the party.
Chubatemjen became Chishi's Finance Minister replacing 'newsmaker' Tiameren under the Jamir government. Rio was Chishi's Power Minister -- Rio's first elevation as a cabinet minister.
In 1990 Governor Thomas, during the VP Singh regime at the Centre, did not summon the assembly and had even declined to meet two Congress observers, Rajesh Pilot and S S Ahluwalia, saying the views of Congress MPs were not required on a political situation in Nagaland.
Later in 1992 Governor Thomas had dissolved the assembly in exercise of powers under Art 172 (2-B) of the Constitution on the advice of the Chief Minister Vamuzo. But he did not consult all powerful Union Home Ministry.
Even a government led by hardcore socialist Chandrashekhar at the Centre was no different when it came to use of Art 356.
In 1990, it had dismissed the DMK ministry of M Karunanidhi in Tamil Nadu, despite lack of any adverse report from the state governor, to seek support from Rajiv Gandhi’s Congress which was wooing Karunanidhi’s rival, J Jayalalitha of the AIADMK.
The Chandrashekhar government also dismissed the Mahanta government in Assam and ULFA and NSCN were banned.
Ironically, the Congress party is now at the receiving end of the alleged imperial and Hitler-like character of governance, protesting the “murder of democracy”.
The purpose of Art 356 is remedial and to restore constitutional machinery. It is neither punitive nor to settle partisan scores with the government of a state run by a political party different from from the party at the centre.
ends
No comments:
Post a Comment