Eleven years ago, November 26, India’s defences against external threats were put to test at its commercial capital Mumbai. That terrible terror attack is still fresh in memory. Come 2015, that same date of November 26 was adopted as Constitution Day. If in 2008 this day saw the nation’s security apparatus being pounded by mercenaries from outside the country, the day this year has been marked by threats to the Constitution itself from within, and coincidentally from the same state of which Mumbai is the capital. The trouble in Maharashtra started with the BJP-Shiv Sena alliance falling apart after elections. It paved the way for a Shiv Sena-NCP-Congress alliance that staked claim for government formation. But in what was later termed as a ‘midnight coup’ of sorts, Devendra Fadnavis was sworn-in Chief Minister and breakaway NCP leader Ajit Pawar as the Deputy Chief Minister November 23. It also came to light that Ajit, who had been an accused in a Rs70,000-crore irrigation scam that spanned a decade of his stewardship of that department as minister, was removed from under the Enforcement Directorate’s lens in nine cases. It was a move that depicted the BJP as an outright power hungry political outfit that overlooked huge corrupt acts for its own benefit. It stripped that party’s claim to be upholders of utmost moral height.
The duo, of course, resigned from their posts November 26, accepting failure to cobble an alliance together and the numbers required to form a government. The hilarious bit is that the BJP also demonstrated it was a novice in power play. The Pawar family not only got the cases removed and rubbed the BJP’s nose in the dirt but Ajit Pawar, in term of real time maneuvering, managed to resign well before Devendra Fadnavis. That compelled the BJP to follow suit and Fadnavis must have been terribly surprised of his bad sense of timing. Politics is dependent, to a great extent, on perfect timing. That initiative was lost. The joke-of-a-government collapsed just a day before the state held a Floor test as ordered by the Supreme Court and on a day when the Shiv Sena-NCP-Congress alliance declared that they had the support of 162 MLAs in front of the media.
Also Read
In this entire drama that unfolded over a period of about a month, two Constitutional offices played prominent roles. First, November 11, the governor of Maharashtra, BS Koshyari, declined to accommodate the request of Shiv Sena for three days to submit letters of support and rejected its claim to form the government, although the BJP had expressed its inability to form a government November 9. This led to the governor’s decision being challenged in the Supreme Court and subsequently the imposition of President’s rule in that state. While the President’s rule continued to be in force till November 23, things changed in a flash. At 5.47 am that day, a Saturday, President’s rule was lifted and Fadnavis and Ajit sworn in to their respective positions. The tearing hurry in the case was suspicious, and not above suspicion. What is worse is that while political dramas are not expected to be played by the book, the holders of Constitutional offices are required to never go against the Constitution, not just in its letter but also in its spirit. Even if the stand that the offices have taken in the instance may be valid in letter, it may not be kosher when it comes to upholding the spirit of the book. Here the Protector may be termed as the Attacker.
But in the wholly unwelcome goings-on in Maharashtra, one tiny ray of hope came in the form of the Supreme Court’s comparatively quick action. The Supreme Court bench comprising Justices N V Ramana, Ashok Bhushan and Sanjiv Khanna heard the petition November 26 and ordered a floor test within 24 hours. This was followed by the resignations, first of Ajit followed by Fadnavis. Not only the 3 Judge Bench gave no time for foul play to the BJP, but it also greatly helped in redemption of its reputation that was damaged to a massive extent by the former CJI Ranjan Gogoi’s acts.
In countries such as the US, actions of persons holding constitutional offices such as the President or the Governor, that go against the very creed that they are to protect can draw action such as impeachment. Indira Gandhi has always been criticized by the BJP for misusing Constitutional posts and privileges for benefitting her own political ends yet it did not refrain from taking the same path itself. The greed for power in Maharashtra is very understandable. Money from that state could make or break political power at the national level. Sadly, by dragging India’s top most Constitutional posts into the controversy, the BJP leadership has not only tarnished the image of those individuals but it has also set the stage for raising many important questions about those posts.
