No government has ever appointed citizens to constitutional posts (president, vice president, governors/Lt governors, etc,) knowing that the person harbours partisan views that could be antithetical to it. Often ridiculed as being akin to ‘Old Age Homes’, the various presidential or gubernatorial Bhawans/Niwases were typically afforded onto partisan ‘has-beens’ who were well versed with constitutional imperatives, by virtue of political longevity.
Such nominations were at par for the course as they suggested eminence, dignity, and maturity for the incumbent ‘First Citizen’, even if it was tantamount to nominating one of their ‘own’. There were also some who were appointed for their professional or scholarly accomplishments in varied fields (think, APJ Abdul Kalam or Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan), the selection of whom elevated public perceptions of the appointing dispensation.
There Used To Be a Modicum of Freedom of Expression
However, history suggests a mixed bag of outcomes over the years, as many of those who assumed the said constitutional offices, after that, observed a strictly constitutional and apolitical outlook – whereas many displayed a sense of regrettable partisanship or indebtedness to the powers that appointed them. For each dignified constitutionalist like President KR Narayanan or Governor Gopal Gandhi, there was an obsequious President Fakhruddin Ali Ahmed or an over-enthusiastic Governor Romesh Bhandari.
Many, like the first Rashtrapati Dr Rajendra Prasad or even the quintessential politician and later President Gianni Zail Singh, refused to tow the blind line of the government composed of their (former) partisan persuasion. India and its experiment in democracy was better for the fearlessly apolitical and constitutionally upright conduct of these few.
It was never a perfect situation as there were always some who never outgrew their partisanship. Yet, the few who did so ensured perennial hope, decorum, and morality of the constitutional ‘Idea of India’, that necessitated values like liberality, secularity, and inclusivity, beyond petty politics.
Even in the recent past, when there has been an extreme diversity of personalities, sensibilities, and political affiliations with the likes of Atal Behari Vajpayee, Manmohan Singh, IK Gujral, Narasimha Rao, VP Singh et al, there was always a modicum of freedom of expression afforded onto the incumbents of constitutional posts to posit a contrarian or independent view from that of the ruling dispensation – but not anymore.
Two Disconcerting Observations by the Apex Court
Recent times have seen either a complete diminishment or alternatively partisan ‘flag-waving’ norm to the extent that there is not a single voice of meaningful dissent by the ‘nominated’. The days of ‘returning the file for reconsideration’ are only and only reserved for States which happen to host governments of the opposition parties. Otherwise, a North Korean style of conformity and echo chamber, thrives.
In a telling move of the preferred template that increasingly is one of the most garrulous and openly partisan gubernatorial appointees who was involved in a no-holds-barred slugfest (admittedly, with an equally combative Chief Minister) was not asked to show any restraint, rectitude or maturity befitting a Constitutional post (as that can never be equated to the theatrics of a political Chief Ministers), but was instead elevated to the post of Vice President.
The message to all other appointees with such an elevation was unequivocal, and the same has been understood and manifested by others with matching compliance and enthusiasm. Meanwhile, the vice president in his even higher constitutional chair has kept up the very selective fire eg, his joining ranks in the executive-versus-judiciary fracas, expectedly against the judiciary.
It is under these circumstances that within 24 hours the Supreme Court had to make two extremely disconcerting observations on the prevailing situation pertaining to the conduct of Gubernatorial offices, in two Opposition-run states (Delhi and Maharashtra, when the latter was run by an Opposition coalition).
'A Serious Issue for Democracy'
While the run-ins between the LG and the CM in Delhi are an old hat that did not spare what is now inelegantly called ‘double-engine’ status i.e., Tejinder Khanna-Shiela Dikshit era. However, the brazen one-upmanship that has been unleashed in recent times makes one cringe thinking about the platitudes of constitutional sobriety – both sides are equally obdurate and uncouth, beyond words. The earlier notions of the constitutional appointee to be different as the ‘bigger person’ and demonstrate a certain large-heartedness, accommodation and decency as opposed to the clearly partisan post of chief minister, has been relegated to the bins, and how!
It took a five-judge Constitution bench to call out the Delhi LG’s unwarranted interference in matters beyond public order, police, and land.
The CJI had to embarrassingly tell the additional solicitor representing the LG’s office, “Why don't you advise the LG that he cannot nominate members in the MCD. He has to act as per the aid and advice of the government." Like a stuck record, the same issue resurfaces with the constitutional office putting a spoke in the wheels of the elected dispensation.
That said, the language, tenor and theatrics adopted by the Delhi government do not dignify Indian democracy either, which languishes like a poor shadow of its past.
Similarly, the unending series of vile accusations and even viler counteraccusations between the permutation and combination of coalition parties in Maharashtra notwithstanding, it was the rebuke to the former governor (serving at the time) that was reflective of the ‘new-normal’ of deep regression and suppression in Indian democracy.
In as blunt a shout-out as possible, the Supreme Court plainly stated that the governor was not entitled to enter the political arena and play sides in inter or intra-party disputes. It worryingly noted that his actions were, “not in accordance with law” and called Maharashtra's political crisis a "serious issue for democracy."
Wake Up and Smell the Coffee
The governor in question was not a wet-behind-the-ear rookie but an experienced former chief minister of a state, who has been a member of the Upper and Lower houses in both state and national politics, as also a leader of Opposition and a party president in his state.
The former governor’s meek justification that he didn’t think that he’d been punished or a vacuous deflection that “It is the job of media persons, analysts it is the job of lawyers to discuss it... Discuss the Supreme Court's decision” is a sad footnote to an otherwise fulfilling political career. This is the same person who as a governor had labelled Chhatrapati Shivaji as an icon of the ‘olden days’ and posited a sitting Union minister from the ruling party as the ‘icon of modern times.’
It is the endless efforts to ingratiate themselves with the ruling dispensation and its postures that have hit new lows. Meanwhile, the seamless silence and invisibility of the Raj Bhawans in the so-called ‘double-engine’ states is re-confirmatory of the storyline of diminished institutions of checks and balances in the Indian democracy.
India currently ranks a dismal 108th on the Electoral Democracy Index and has been named in the top 10 autocratising countries in the last decade, and to continuously suggests some conspiracy by the usual suspects like ‘West’, ‘China’, ‘Soros’, ‘Anti-Indian Lobby’ etc., has been done to death. Similarly, even if getting ranked below Afghanistan or Pakistan in Freedom of Press is hard to believe or digest, the trajectory of the trend is hardly unbelievable.
It is time to wake up and smell the coffee as a large part of the citizenry was equally enthralled by trains running on time and the overall law-and-order situation between 1975 and 1977, but the damage of those times is still being felt today.
Finally, it is important to reiterate that the constitutional offices, investigative agencies, and other apolitical arms of governance were never truly independent ever – it is just the sheer extent and scale of compromise today, is unparalleled. The diminishment of apolitical constitutional offices is a clear reflection of the times, that be.
(The author is a Former Lt Governor of Andaman & Nicobar Islands and Puducherry. This is an opinion piece and the views expressed above are the author’s own. The Quint neither endorses nor is responsible for the same.)
(At The Quint, we question everything. Play an active role in shaping our journalism by becoming a member today.)