New Delhi, May 12
Amidst predictions of a hung Lok Sabha, constitutional experts by and large endorse the principle laid down by former President K.R. Narayanan to seek list of supporting MPs from the leader claiming majority in the House, even as President A P J Abdul Kalam, continued his
consultations with legal experts. However, some experts were of the view that President can direct the House to elect the leader in the event of a fractured mandate.
Former Lok Sabha Secretary-General Subhash C. Kashyap said the prime responsibility cast upon the President is to ensure formation of a stable government and to ensure this he could send a message to the House under Article 86(2) asking it to elect a leader so that he could be invited to form the government.
Asked whether there was any provision for such an option before the President, he said, “The President is empowered under Article 86(2) to send any message to Parliament, this will include sending such an advice. It is a duty cast upon him under the Constitution.”
He said the Constitution Review Commission had also made a unanimous recommendation that in the event of a hung Lok Sabha, the best option before the President will be to direct the House to elect a leader. “This will not only ensure formation of a stable and viable government but also stop the horse-trading and unethical bargain,” he said.
Senior Supreme Court lawyer, Dr Rajiv Dhawan said “Under the Constitution it is a duty cast upon the President to ensure formation of a stable and viable government and to achieve this, it is not necessary for him to invite the leader of the single largest party.”
Endorsing the principle laid down by former President K.R. Narayanan to seek the list of MPs supporting him from a leader claiming majority, Dr Dhawan said, “Inviting the leader of single largest party or
group had failed when Atal Bihari Vajpayee could not prove his majority in 1996, when he was administered the oath by the then President Shanker Dayal Sharma.”
“It shows that the test of single largest party is not a viable test,” Dr Dhawan said adding “this gives credibility to the K R Narayanan principle. “Moreover, inviting the leader of single largest party without ensuring that he enjoys the majority support in the House, will be immoral and unethical as it will lead to horse-trading.”
On the question of anti-defection law, if MPs defy the party line and support another party or group, he said they could not be disqualified straight way. “But during the voting on confidence motion, if they take a line contrary to the party’s stated stand, they can be
disqualified.”
Identical views were expressed by Former Additional Solicitor General C.S. Vaidyanathan, saying that a leader to be invited by the President should enjoy the “confidence of the Lok Sabha.”
“The President may invite the leader of a single largest party, or that of a pre-poll and post-poll alliance, but the important question before him will be the formation of a stable government,” he says.
As far as disqualification on defection is concerned, the condition of mandatory one-third MPs splitting has been removed with the 91st Constitutional amendment. But for the merger with another party, the defecting group’s number should be more than 50 per cent of its Parliamentary party strength.
The President has so far consulted Attorney-General Soli J. Sorabjee, senior advocate K Parasaran and some other senior lawyers.
