M A I L B A G

SC stepped in to undo the wrong

Jurists and intellectuals have questioned the actions of Goa and Jharkhand Governors. One wonders what legacy we are going to bequeath to our future generations. We boast that our country is the world’s largest democracy but the quality of democracy as seen in Goa and Jharkhand makes one hide his face in shame.

The Supreme Court had to intervene in Jharkhand because of the legislature’s failure to uphold the spirit of the Constitution. Thank God, better sense prevailed at last and we were able to save our prestige to some extent. However, some questions remain to be answered. Did we fail to establish healthy conventions? Do we need to amend the Constitution further to make it more elaborate? Shouldn’t we appoint apolitical persons as Governors?

TIRATH RAM SHARMA, Pathankot

II

The Governors of Goa and Jharkhand have drawn flak from the NDA, the media and the general public and justifiably so. By taking blatantly unfair decisions at the behest of the UPA government at the Centre, they have not only brought their high office into disrepute but also set a very bad precedent. If allowed to go unchallenged, this would erode people’s faith in the democratic institutions.

India is the world’s largest democracy. The partisan way in which these high dignitaries have acted does not augur well for our democratic system. Clearly, the high office of the Governor has been demeaned.

RAJ PAL GUPTA, Ludhiana

III

Under the Constitution, the Governor does enjoy a fair amount of discretion in appointing any person as the Chief Minister if he is satisfied that he/she would be able to prove his majority on the floor of the State Assembly. The crisis in Jharkhand was an offshoot of the fractured mandate and a difficult task performed by the Governor. Either way, he would have been criticised for his action.

The Governor’s action would have been vindicated had Mr Shibu Soren won the floor test. When Mr Soren did not take the floor test on March 11, as mandated by the Supreme Court, he lost the right to continue in office and had to resign. A Chief Minister can hold office only if enjoys the majority support of the legislature, not otherwise. This is what happened in Jharkhand.

PUNEET SHARMA, Chandigarh

IV

The partisan conduct of Goa and Jharkhand Governors has only added to the already sagging credibility of the politicians in the eyes of the public. Unfortunately, the Congress has once again shown scant respect for democratic institutions and people’s verdict.

It is time experts suggested fresh measures to tackle this kind of problem created by the Governors. These white elephants are anything but neutral appointees. It should also be debated whether this burdensome post is really needed.

I feel the Election Commission should be entrusted the duty of notifying the largest pre-poll alliance or single largest party to be invited by the Governor to form the government. In case of a hung Assembly, if the largest pre-poll alliance is unable to prove majority in five days, the next party or alliance should be called to do the same in as many days. The President should be given more powers to reign in erring Governors independent of the council of ministers.

Dr ASHOK KAPAHTIA, Shimla