dailyO
Politics

Why Delhi needs a chief minister now

Advertisement
Rajeev Dhavan
Rajeev DhavanNov 04, 2014 | 15:46

Why Delhi needs a chief minister now

Democracy in Delhi has become a ghost in suspended animation waiting for the afterlife. This situation has been brought about by the arrant nonsense of AAP and the manipulations by lieutenant governor Najeeb Jung in conjunction with the BJP. Jung has given a new twist to the adage: uneasy lies the head that wears a crown.

Perhaps, somewhere in his mind, he wants to hold on to not just this, but also any other kingly crown that may be offered to him. If life in power is a gamble, it suffers vaulting ambition.

Advertisement

Elections

Delhi went into elections on December 4, 2013; the electorate was 1,19,32,067, of which 67 per cent (75,94,485) cast their vote. No sooner had AAP got 28 seats out of 70, as against BJP’s 32 and Congress’s eight, Kejriwal declared he had his sights on the Maharashtra elections. BJP refused to form a government on December 12, Congress gave unconditional support to AAP on December 13. Kejriwal, with his brazen foolishness, laid down 18 conditions for the cooperation of the BJP and Congress (as if they cared), wanting a referendum on the Congress-supported AAP configuration (another election?) on December 18. He formed the government on December 22 only to resign on February 16, 2014, with the President’s Rule being imposed on February 17, 2014.

It should have been clear to L-G Jung in February that this impasse was an unresolvable stalemate. Both Congress, and later BJP at the Centre, entered into unbridled opportunism. For one, it was “achche din ayenge”, while for the other: “phir subha kabhi toh ayegee”. Eyes were on the general elections in May, where BJP had a clean sweep in Delhi.

For the BJP, Delhi’s return to democracy was inextricably linked to its own electoral fortunes. BJP had two options: call elections immediately or attempt a minority government on the December 2013 result or invite defections or reduce the overall figure to 63 to give it a majority. BJP was in power at the Centre, with the ultimate power over Delhi’s fate.

Advertisement

Jung became their most obedient civil servant. He seemed to enjoy the windfall that he would reign.

Keeping Assemblies in suspension so that the Centre’s favourite party could assume power was very much a legacy from the Indira Gandhi-era. In Nehru’s time, there was one suspension in 1951 (Punjab). Between 1967-77, sixteen Assemblies were kept suspended to encourage defection and government formation. In only four were they subsequently dissolved.

Administration

The Bhagwan Sahay Committee (1972), Sarkaria Commission (1988) and Constitution Commission (2005) deprecated this. Shanti Bhushan was the law minister when nine Assemblies were dissolved in 1977. Mrs Gandhi returned the compliment in 1980. The Emergency provision for all states (Article 356) was amended in 1978 to put some discipline on President’s Rule to one year, with other safeguards. Before that, Nagaland was under the President’s Rule for two years, eight months and three days.

But the provisions that re-established Delhi as a National Capital Region in 1991 had special Emergency provisions (Article 239AB), which allowed the Emergency Rule for “such periods and subject to such conditions as may be specified”.

Such a rule could be for constitutional failure or “the proper administration of the National Capital Territory if necessary or expedient to do so". These are draconian provisions — an invitation to the opportunist, and ambitious. We are dealing here with an opportunist BJP and an ambitious L-G. The period between dissolution and elections should not be more than six months, although the Supreme Court in 2002 declared this was salutary and not mandatory.

Advertisement

Challenges

Post-Kejriwal’s resignation on February 16, 2014, there was no constitutional crisis. In 1998, Vajpayee was the PM for 13 days, then the elections were called. In Delhi, only resignations and defections could give the BJP numbers to form a minority government so that the people of Delhi were not cheated with an immediate election. BJP should have been given a maximum one month or so (say till March 31) to decide. Even if BJP wanted to wait for the General Election results in May where it made a clean sweep, elections should have been called thereafter.

The rule of the President through the lieutenant governor cheats the democratic process. The BJP government at the Centre cannot use these provisions to look for the propitious moment when it feels: (a) that it can achieve an electoral victory, or (b) that it can seduce legislators towards itself to reduce the number of legislators so that its 32 seats become a majority. This is how India’s politics perpetuates democratic evil. Jung is having a ball, dominating officers, giving himself profile and ruling as BJP’s nominee.

Curiously by September 2014, Jung wanted the President’s nod to invite the BJP minority to form government. AAP’s Yogendra Yadav rightly accused the BJP of lusting for power. Congress wanted the BJP to form the government because they were not ready for an election. This was also BJP’s strategy, i.e., to wait until the impending elections to four states were over. AAP claimed that Rs 4 crores were offered to its MLA on October 21. Kejriwal challenged the BJP to hold Delhi elections. AAP moved the Supreme Court, which demanded a decision, slamming the Union Government and Jung: "(T)hese people are trying to hoodwink the court. Nothing since has been done by (them)". The solution is simple: "Restore Democracy to Delhi through elections NOW".

Last updated: November 04, 2014 | 15:46
IN THIS STORY
Please log in
I agree with DailyO's privacy policy