Governors on warpath
The tussle between the Governors and state governments in West Bengal and Kerala is unfortunate. While West Bengal Governor Jagdeep Dhankhar has been on a collision course with the Mamata Banerjee-led TMC government, criticising it frequently for ‘post-poll violence’, the state government is also not amused with him for proroguing the state Assembly first and now refusing to abide by the CM’s recommendation to convene the House session in March. The Governor has not just been insisting that he is acting in consonance with constitutional requirements but also taking to social media to make known his views resulting in the CM blocking him on Twitter. In Kerala, Governor Arif Mohammed Khan has offended the CPI(M) government that wants him recalled and is seeking powers to remove a Governor, saying gubernatorial post-holders should not work against the interests of the state government and that the Centre should consult the states before appointing Governors. The Governor, in turn, has been accusing the state government of trying to dictate terms to him.
Centre-State ties require a working relationship and while it is not unusual for different parties to be in power at the Centre and in states, public interest requires them to work in tandem in a parliamentary democracy. While the Governor is expected to act on the advice of the council of ministers, he remains the constitutional head of the executive in the state. Consultation and consensus remain the prerequisites for the smooth functioning of the government machinery. In a political system where securing a majority may make the party in power at the Centre act unilaterally, states are wary of the office of the Governor being used to destabilise an elected government. The problem only indicates a trust deficit.
The Constitution makes the Governor a representative of the Union. He is appointed by the President, who also has the power to remove him. Confrontation between state governments and Governors are not unusual but they should adhere to political decorum and constitutional propriety with redress of public grievances being the common aim.
