The landmark decision of the Supreme Court Wednesday February 14 disqualifying 13 Bahujan Samajwadi Party (BSP) legislators in Uttar Pradesh—who broke away from the party to support the Mulayam Singh Yadav government in August 2003—has not only posed fresh trouble for the Samajwadi Party government in UP, but the disqualification issue has created differences of opinion within the Congress led UPA Government itself. Having been a victim itself, the Left front led by the CPI (M), which is a key ally of the UPA government, has even gone to the extent of demanding an amendment to the infamous Article 356. Rightly so, the CPI (M) feels that the article has been misused earlier on several occasions in the past as a tool to dislodge democratically elected governments on the mere pretext that the party in power at the Centre was ‘politically’ opposed to the party running the government in the State. But much water has passed since the days when Article 356 had became a blatant weapon of political vendetta. Thanks to the judiciary and the several judgments it has pronounced (list of dos and don’ts), the misuse of Article 356 has been kept in check to a large extent.
And this is where hopefully the Congress leadership led by Sonia Gandhi will be guided i.e. to be prudent and not to take any step that will destroy the party’s own democratic credibility. The Congress should show greater respect for the sentiments of regional parties who have always been opposed to the illegal imposition of President’s Rule. However, if at all there is a valid case wherein support in the State Legislature for the Mulayam Singh’s government is in doubt, then before jumping the gun, the Congress should do the right thing, which is to follow the due process of law. The Governor should be allowed to call for a trial of strength on the floor of the house. Although there may be valid reasons to suggest that a floor test will only make room for more horse trading to take place, the basic requirement calls for a democratic trial of strength on the floor of the Legislature. And as rightly pointed out by the Supreme Court on earlier occasions, this trial of support cannot be determined by Raj Bhavan and certainly not the Congress party sitting in Delhi.
The Congress to reach a final decision on whether to go ahead with President’s rule in Uttar Pradesh should also be more cautious in order to avoid a Bihar like embarrassment or the scenario where President APJ Abdul Kalam returns the Proclamation. In this regard, the party should revisit the Supreme Court’s landmark judgment in October 7, 2005, which held that the presidential order to dissolve the Bihar assembly earlier that year was unconstitutional. The country’s apex court had then helped in restoring a semblance of balance against the excess created by the decision of the executive. The apex court in essence has always upheld the supremacy of the constitution and any misadventure on the part of the UPA government should also be treated as malafide and unconstitutional.
