Chief Ministers in the appointment of Governors (GS Paper 2, Polity and Governance)
Context:
- With the rise in instances of tension, and even stand-offs, between State governments and Governors, there is once again a debate on the role of the Raj Bhavan.
What are the roles and responsibilities of a Governor?
- The post of Governor is actually inherited from the past. The Mughals had Governors in order to be able to reach out to vast territories of the empire. The British also had Governors to be able to govern India.
- The Governor has various functions, such as addressing the joint session of the Assembly and the Budget session, and signing Bills that have been passed by the Assembly.
- The Governor has administrative and political functions to perform.
- Indi is a federal country, which has a clear design that there will be constituent States who elect their own governments, and a Union of States. So, there is a need to ensure unity and some level of uniformity across the Union. This creates its own tension.
- One of the designs of the Constitution, to supposedly manage this tension, is the post of Governor as a link between the Centre and the States.
(Theleaflet.in)
Appointment of Governor:
- As per Article 155 of the Constitution, the Governor is appointed by the President.
- The Governor is supposed to be an independent, non-partisan person. He/she is supposed to keep the interests of the State in mind and also ensure that the link between the State and the Centre is maintained in a smooth way.
- The appointment of the Governor today is in the hands of the ruling party in the Centre.They always take decisions as directed by the Union Home Ministry and the Central government.
- The relationship between the Governor and the Chief Minister is what determines smooth functioning. But this has not been happening in many, many cases.
Various Committee & Commissions:
- Up to 1967, when the Congress was at the Centre and in most States, it went smoothly. Then things went bad in 1967. Between 1967 and 1971, there were three high-level bodies which looked at this issue.
- The report of the First Administrative Reforms Commission was submitted in 1969.
- The Tamil Nadu government set up the Rajamannar Committee. And the President Secretariat set up a committee. All three said that the Chief Minister should be consulted before the Governor is appointed.
- The National Commission to Review the Working of the Constitution suggested that it would be appropriate to suggest a committee comprising the Prime Minister, the Vice-President, the Home Minister, the Speaker of the Lok Sabha and the Chief Minister of the State concerned to select a Governor.
Sarkaria Commission:
- The Sarkaria Commission, set up in 1983 to examine the Centre-State relationship on various points, felt that the Chief Minister should be consulted before appointing the Governor, for proper working of the parliamentary system.
- The Sarkaria Commission, therefore, probably thought that if the appointment was made in consultation with the Chief Minister, there would be smooth functioning and better relationships. But the Governor has to make independent decisions, whether it’s the question of deciding a government, the numbers, or the vote of confidence.
- The opinion of the Chief Minister would go a long way in helping make the functioning of the Governor in a State more effective and maybe more conducive to the interests of the State.
Why Chief Minister should not involve in the process of selection of the Governor?
- The Governor cannot be made to feel that the Chief Minister was one of those responsible for his selection; the Governor has to be above the Chief Minister, be independent, be able to function in a non-partisan manner, and not be beholden to the ruling party or to the Chief Minister.
- There isno criteria, no minimum qualifications laid out for a Governor. These are often retirement perks or rewards for unstinting loyalty to a particular party. Governors cannot be called before a court of law. These are things which have to be kept in mind.
- The Prime Minister cannot appoint somebody because he/she is happy with the performance of someone who may have been a Minister or a political leader of the party and has to be accommodated.
- These are the considerations which come in the appointment of Governors — not qualifications or the capacity to be able to administer the State.
Governor acting as a link:
- The Governor speaks about the Chief Minister’s government. Therefore, there has to be cooperation and coordination between the State government and the Governor, irrespective of whether their political loyalties differ.
- The majority, minority, vote of confidence has to be decided on the floor of the House. It is the elected representatives who have to decide and present the majority to the Governor.
- The running of a normal system in the State of majority rule requires that the Governor not be beholden to the Chief Minister.
- The Chief Minister’s powers don’t become insignificant; he/she is the elected leader of the State. Legislation, running the State, the administration, ensuring law and order… all these are responsibilities of the State government.
- The Governor is supposed to be a friend, philosopher and guide, helping from the back, sorting out issues and resolving disputes, even between political parties.
- The Governor has to at times advise the Centre on what is happening and what needs to be done. That brings the Centre and the State together.
Discretionary Powers:
- The Governor is expected to act on the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers, with a few exceptions.
- Like whom to invite to form the government, in times of no-confidence motions, in a situation demanding imposition of Article 356 (in case of failure of constitutional machinery in the State), because no Chief Minister is going to advise that Article 356 be imposed. So, that will have to be under the discretion of the Governor.
- It comes back to how independent the Governor is, how the Governor acts. It is hard to ensure that the Governor maintains loyalty to the Constitution and not to the government at the Centre.
