HVK Archives: Turning the tables
Turning the tables - The Observer
Posted By ashok (ashokvc@giasbm01.vsnl.net.in)
4 September 1996
Title : Turning the tables
Author :
Publication : The Observer
Date : September 4, 1996
A more bitter anti-climax could not have been imagined
for the BJP. The one-day session of the Gujarat assembly
on Wednesday was summoned specifically to demonstrate
that the BJP government led by Mr Suresh Mehta still
commands majority support. But that agenda was sidelined
when deputy speaker Chandu Bhai who was in the chair
adjourned the house sine die. But not before he had in
effect formally recognised the breakaway faction from the
ruling BJP - the Maha Gujarat Janata Party led by Dilip
Parikh -as a separate group. The implication of Mr
Chandu Bhai's ruling is that the BJP no longer enjoys
majority support. With the departure of 46 members from
its ranks, the BJP's strength has now been reduced from
119 to 73 which is well short of a majority in a house of
180.
But the BJP is bound to contest this arithmetic
vehemently. Not only because 18 MLAs who had signed the
notice of split have publicly switched their loyalty back
to the parent party. But also because the manner in
which the sustainability of the split was decided by the
presiding officer was not in consonance with the letter
and spirit of the anti defection law. According to the
rules prescribed under it, a presiding officer is
required to ascertain the veracity of the signatures of
MLAs who are a party to a split by quizing them
individually. The same rules have also laid down
rigorous procedures for the verification. Mr Chandu Bhai
has, however, given all these elaborate procedures the go
by. Instead, he had summarily accorded the split
official imprimatur subject to nothing more than his
subjective satisfaction.
This suggests that the presiding officer has either not
applied his mind judiciously or that he was acting in a
partisan manner though, ironically, he was implicitly
trusted by the ruling party until the penultimate moment.
In either scenario, democracy has been impoverished. It
is unlikely that the arbitrary ruling of the presiding
officer would go unchallenged. But in the immediate
context it has contributed to muddying the political
waters in the state further, creating a piquant situation
for the governor in the bargain, who has now to mull the
question of whether or not to dismiss the government.
Back
Top
|
