Author: Arvind Singh
Publication: www.india.com
Date: January 27, 2001
In 1962, the then governor of Maharashtra
Smt. Vijayalaxmi Pandit sent her customary Republic Day speech to state
cabinet led by Chief Minister V.P. Naik for approval. She ostensibly had
made some remarks on policy decisions taken by the government. The cabinet
suggested some changes in the draft. Indignant she was, she complained
to her brother who was then the prime minister of the country. Nehru developed
a cold shoulder to her complaint giving enough indication that she had
a very poor case to defend. The reason to recall this episode is very timely.
Constitutionally, the head of a
government, either President or Governor is figurative and nominal head
and they run the administration with the advice of a body directly elected
called cabinet led by prime minister or chief minister. Though the nominal
heads have some functions to perform granted by the Constitution, they
are mainly ceremonial and conventional functions like, assenting on bills
etc.
Since, the election of K.R. Narayanan
as the President of India, he has conducted himself unconventionally to
embarrass his government in public. He became the first Indian president
to vote in a general election, thereby displaying his choice of one political
party over other. Although as a citizen of the country, he has right to
express himself including voting. This conduct, however, is in disharmony
with concept of neutrality, which his office is supposed to uphold.
Similarly, he had issued a condemnation
notice after gruesome killing of Graham Steins. But took days to utter
himself on the Pakistani attack in Kargil sector. No wonder, Communists
in India still believe that the Kargil War was an orchestrated effort by
the ruling regimes; both in India and Pakistan. He was first who broke
protocol of giving the customary Republic Day speech and preferred to be
interviewed by a confirmed Communist.
On the just passed Republic Day,
he chose to publicly oppose several key decisions of the government, which
he himself is heading. Firstly, he radically differs from the verdict recently
delivered by Supreme Court on the Narmada dam. He is worried that the dam-affected
population was getting a raw deal from the Union and state governments.
It is his job, however, to influence administrative decisions and turn
them towards what he deems fit. His recent statements can be phrased as
washing dirty linen in the public.
Secondly, the President has also
joined the rank of those who are agitated over review of the constitution.
The Constitutional Review Commission (CRC) has recently issued a paper
suggesting indirect elections from Zilla Parishad to parliament on the
ground that Mahatma Gandhi had favoured. The President, unfortunately,
has compared the idea with "basic democracy" or "guided democracy" of Ayub
Khan of Pakistan. The analogy sought here was not only confounding but
also bizarre in the sense that it refused to look at the prevailing atmosphere
in the then Pakistan and the present India. Ayub Khan wanted to use democracy
to wield and perpetuate despotic power. If some one believes that Vajpayee
also using democracy to continue his rule, is it not confounding?
Moreover, why do we forget that
the CRC has only advisory functions and its recommendations will be carefully
weighed by the parliament through debates? The parliament is free to decline
or accept any proposal put before it by any agency whether cabinet or CRC.
Democracy will be spoilt if preserved but flourish if experimented.
Lastly, this writing is not to criticize
the President that but to praise the NDA government. Though he has criticized
their policies they have maintained peace with Rashtrapati Bhavan for the
good and thereby avoided major controversy. At least from their side they
refused to wash dirty linen in the public.