National

Hammer And Tongs

Buta Singh gets a harsh SC verdict on the Bihar assembly dissolution issue. <a href=pti_coverage.asp?gid=65 target=_blank> Updates</a>

Advertisement

Hammer And Tongs
info_icon

Click here for the full text of the Supreme Court judgement on Bihar Dissolution case [PDF format]

***

It never rains, but it pours. First, there was the oilspill of Volckergate, then the Quattrocchi affair, reviving memories of the Bofors scandal. For the UPA government's political managers, who have been staggering from crisis to crisis, it was time to get into fire-fighting mode once again, after the Supreme Court passed strictures on the dissolution of the Bihar assembly, severely indicting Governor Buta Singh.

As a delighted Opposition—read BJP—and the unofficial Opposition—read the Left—demanded that Buta Singh immediately step down, and senior Congress leaders, including those believed to be close to party president Sonia Gandhi, said: "There is no option, Buta Singh has to go," encouraging legal opinion began to come in. Views which suggested that regardless of the motives for dissolving the state assembly or, for that matter, public opinion, the government was not on as shaky ground as it had thought it was on—legally, that is.

Indeed, PMO sources stressed that constitutional expert Fali Nariman who had generally expressed his approval of the SC judgement and had said the council of ministers "has to own moral responsibility for whatever has happened in Bihar", had also said that there was no legal reason why Buta Singh should go. It would be another matter, he said, if he decided to quit on his own. These sources added that the verdict was "only an elaboration of the earlier one", and that the prime minister had already explained that the decision at the time was taken on the basis of the information on hand.

At the time of writing (January 25), an informal high-level meeting, attended by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, home minister Shivraj Patil, defence minister Pranab Mukherji, law minister H.R. Bharadwaj (HRD minister Arjun Singh was unwell and could not attend) and Attorney General Milon Bannerji had just concluded. Patil also met Congress president Sonia Gandhi separately, sources said, to discuss the possibility of an honourable exit for Buta Singh—whether his exit should wait till the impending reshuffle of governors or whether he should go now and be rehabilitated after a cooling-off period.

Meanwhile, government sources indicated that all options were still being explored, including the one of a review of the apex court judgement by a larger bench. Patil gave a hint of this when he told journalists late on the evening of January 25 that there was no decision as yet as he needed time to study the 400-page judgement and that he would speak to them again on January 27: "It (the question of dissolution and imposition of President's rule) was discussed everywhere, in Bihar, by the cabinet and in Parliament." In the same vein, after a cabinet meeting a day earlier, the home minister had said: "This (complexity) is proved by the fact that whereas three judges have held the act unconstitutional, the other two senior judges have disagreed."

Political analysts said the reference to Parliament was a hint that it was not just a cabinet decision based on the governor's advice—President's rule in Bihar was unanimously approved by Parliament and the BJP-led NDA was party to it. Indeed, it is interesting that while the BJP is once again deploying the judgement against the UPA, Bihar chief minister, JD(U) leader and BJP ally Nitish Kumar has been remarkably circumspect. All he has said so far is: "The Supreme Court has virtually endorsed our stand. It has already been endorsed by the people of Bihar who gave us a majority in the elections. But I would not like to comment on the governor as it concerns the dignity of a constitutional body".

Indeed, there is a sense in government that the judiciary has, of late, been encroaching upon the domain of the executive and Parliament: sources stressed it was not so long back that the Illegal Migrants (Determination by Tribunals) Act passed by Parliament was overturned by the Supreme Court; and more recently, after Parliament expelled MPs caught on tape accepting bribes to ask questions, the Supreme Court even accepted a petition against this decision.

Thus far, the government has taken no concrete decision beyond permitting Buta Singh to hoist the national flag in Patna on January 26—as he had expressed a desire to do so. Government sources said that the reason why the Congress was taking its time on deciding what to do with Buta Singh was because it knew that even if he stepped down, that would not be enough for the BJP. Already, leader of the Opposition L.K. Advani has hinted at broadening the scope of attack: "The SC observations may seem harsher against the governor, but the culpability of the prime minister is evidently greater because it was he who convened the meeting of the council of ministers in the dead of night and it is he who was instrumental in misleading the President."

Advertisement

info_icon

But even as the government continues to consult legal opinion, second-guess the political fallout, assess the public mood and monitor the media response, officially both the government and party are being very guarded. So, the prime minister's first response to the verdict was that the Supreme Court judgement would be "accepted and respected". "The Supreme Court has got great authority and we have to respect the judgement," he said.

Simultaneously, Congress spokesperson Abhishek Singhvi said, "The apex court judgement shall be implemented in letter and spirit." But after that, he trained his guns on the BJP. For, while public opinion is important to the Congress, its battle with the BJP has to be fought. He said: "Those who are trying to read words into the Supreme Court judgement against the central government, which the court deliberately and consciously omitted to use, are indulging in political propaganda and misleading the public. If every time a central government decision is overturned by the court and demands for resignations are made by them, then Mr Vajapyee and Mr Advani should have resigned many times over when the apex court gave several adverse orders against the NDA government as in the Ayodhya case and in the Gujarat assembly matter."

Whatever the case, it is certain that the government will have its hands full. For the beleaguered BJP trying to set its house in order, government-related embarrassments are like the proverbial manna from heaven. An interesting footnote to this latest controversy is the fact that the government had decided to start the budget session of Parliament a week earlier than usual, in mid-February, to allow the Opposition to expend its energies on Volckergate and the Quattrocchi affair, before getting down to the serious business of discussing the budget.

Now that decision would seem to be a case of remarkable foresight—for now the Opposition has three instead of two issues to attack the government on.

Advertisement

Tags

    Advertisement

    Advertisement

    Advertisement

    Advertisement

    Advertisement

    Advertisement