Political Bureau
The Economic Times
May 15, 1999
Title: President's move to invite Sonia to form got challenged Author: Political Bureau Publication: The Economic Times Date: May 15, 1999 The Dehi High Court today commenced hearing on a petition challenging President KR Narayanan's invitation to Congress president Sonia Gandhi and not the leader of Opposition Sharad Pawar, to explore the possibility of forming an alternative government after the Vajpayee government was voted out. The public interest litigation (PIL) filed by the Rashtriya Mukti Morcha, a socio-political organisation, alleged that the President by inviting a person who was not even a member of the House and a citizen within the meaning of Article 5 of the Constitution - "which permits only a citizen defined in that Article to seek any elective or public office" - for consultations on an alternative government, had "disregarded the well-established constitutional convention and hurt the basic structure of the Constitution". The PIL, coming as it is on the eve of Lok Sabha polls, may come handy in the BJP's ongoing campaign against Ms Gandhi's foreign origins. With the riding party already questioning the Congress president on whether she was registered as a voter before acquiring Indian citizenship, a fresh controversy on Ms Gandhi's 'legal competence' to seek any election or public office may not augur well for the Congress. Appearing on behalf of the petitioner, senior advocate PN Lekhi said Article 5 of the Constitution recognises three categories of citizens: i) who was born in the territory of India; ii) either of whose parents was born in the territory of India; iii) who has been ordinarily resident in the territory of India for not less than five years immediately preceding the commencement of the Constitution. As for aliens who became citizens of India by virtue of statute enacted by Parliament, the PIL said they were not permanent citizens as their citizenship could be revoked in accordance with the law. During the hour-long arguments, Mr Lekhi contended that only a citizen falling within the meaning of Article 5 could be a claimant for a public office or seek election to Parliament or state legislature.
|
||