How the governor made a mess of Tamil Nadu
Governor Vidyasagar Rao is the one responsible for converting Tamil Nadu’s (TN) politics into a complete farce. After Jayalalithaa’s death, the AIADMK was in power and remains so. There was an inner party struggle in which the governor had no role to play. He was required to hold the portfolio of Maharashtra and TN but when the crisis was taking place in TN, for crucial periods, he stayed away, paving the way for a power struggle.
Turning point
Was he ill? No. Was he on holiday? Was he advised by the BJP to stay away? Possibly. A political mess in TN would give the Sangh an edge. The BJP’s plans are to conquer all of India by means fair or foul. Examples are Arunachal and Uttarakhand. Although AIADMK is its ally, a divided AIADMK would help the BJP to play on religious sentiments and give the people an alternative.
So let us see how the drama unfolded. Panneerselvam (OPS) was the chief minister when Jayalalithaa was disqualified or was ill. When Jaya died on December 6, OPS was elected CM. That should have been in enough to quell doubts about the state government. On December 10 last year, he held his first cabinet meeting. All was smooth until December 29, 2016, which is when the Sasikala faction elected her the general secretary of the party, a position that was earlier held by Jayalalithaa.
This was an intra-party crisis. Everything was tense but quiet for the next month or so. Finally, under pressure, OPS gave his resignation on February 6. The governor, accepting the resignation, properly said: “I hereby request you and the present Council of Ministers to function until the alternative arrangements are made”. OPS acted foolishly. He should not have resigned. His excuse that it was under coercion was absurd. So far, the governor acted correctly.
 |
| Photo: Indiatoday.in |
It is at this juncture that the governor got things wrong. It is reported that Soli Sorabji was his legal advisor. We don’t know what advice he gave, if any, but in consequential terms, what advice the governor had was wrong – irrespective of whether he was a stooge or saboteur or just misled.
Three factors have to be borne in mind. First, this was an intra-party dispute. The governor has no role in an intra-party dispute. Second, the advice based on Bommai’s case that there must be a floor test does not apply. This would apply only if members of the legislature cross over and the strength of AIADMK was in question. Here neither faction claimed that AIADMK has lost their majority. And third, what the governor should have said to either faction: “This being an intra-party dispute, Raj Bhawan cannot decide this. Call your own parliamentary meeting and let me know what you decide quickly. Meanwhile, Panneerselvam (OPS) will remain CM.”
Lobbying
But the governor plunged deeper into intra-party politics. He entertained heavy lobbying in Raj Bhawan. Then he took the decisive step on February 16 of appointing Edappadi Palanisamy (EPS) as CM. There is no basis to this except intra-party lobbying. It would have been different if the DMK had said that the AIADMK had lost its majority. It is difficult to accept that the governor did not know that EPS was Sasikala’s nominee.
Look at the irony. On February 14 (Valentine’s day), Sasikala was convicted for corruption. She was sent to prison for 4 years and disqualified from politics till 2027. Even after this denouement, her faction won. The second mistake was equally unforgivable. After OPS’s resignation on February 6, whose acceptance was put into abeyance, the governor appointed Sasikala sponsored EPS as CM.
This solidified Sasikala’s faction. EPS appointed 30 ministers. In any floor test, the CM has an advantage – by fair and foul means. OPS had been CM from December 6 to February 16. He had also been CM while Jayalalithaa was still alive. He should have continued as CM and asked to continue and face the floor.
Lapses & mischief
But the governor was extraordinarily kind to Sasikala and her faction. He preferred to wait till Sasikala’s criminal appeal was decided by the Supreme Court. Some lawyers have called this “jugaad jurisprudence”. Others called it “pragmatic constitutionalism”. Others, the Sorabji view. By waiting to see if the SC acquitted her or not, he undermined OPS’s possession. On February 14, it became clear that Sasikala was going to jail. On February 16, the Governor removed OPS and appointed Sasikala’s nominee EPS who had Sasikala’s support from jail and he claimed Jayalalithaa’s support from the grave.
The governor’s lapses and mischief are self evident. First, he was not in Chennai when the crisis came. Could an absentee governor appreciate all facts? Then he gave credence to Sasikala who had locked up MLAs in the Golden Bay Resort. He should have demanded their release.
He also converted Raj Bhawan to determining an intra-party dispute which was no concern of his; but he favoured the Sasikala group. And finally, once Sasikala was convicted, he favoured her candidate EPS to the CM’s throne with its inevitable advantages. He then ordered a floor vote which was absurd because if the DMK voted with any faction, AIADMK would lose its majority.
Chaos there was. On the February 18, the Assembly was called to show AIADMK’s strength which was never in doubt. A floor test is hardly the place to determine an intra-party dispute. Sasikala is in jail but her faction won.
(Courtesy: Mail Today)