Recently, West Bengal witnessed a massive tussle between the governor and the Speaker. On January 25, West Bengal Governor Jagdeep Dhankhar visited the assembly premises to pay tributes to Dr B R Ambedkar and during that visit, he launched a fresh attack against Vidhan Sabha Speaker Biman Bandyopadhyay. Ever since, a continuous conflict has been going on between these two constitutional heads. Matters came to such a pass that on Monday, Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee announced that she had blocked the Bengal governor on Twitter, as he had been making derogatory remarks against the state government on that microblogging site.
Such a confrontation between the office of the governor and the head of the legislature or the head of the administration is dangerous for democracy. For the past few years, Dhankhar has been repeatedly attacking the chief minister, legislation, Trinamool MPs, and even bureaucrats of Bengal.
A similar conflict has been going on in Kerala. Governor Arif Mohammad Khan has slammed the government openly on several occasions. However, the severity of these attacks have not crossed the limits of decency. But in Bengal, several sections believe that the governor’s behaviour has been intimidating towards the state.
Under the Modi regime, such conflicts between the state government or the legislature and the governor, mostly in non-BJP ruled states, have become commonplace. However, Bengal also has a long history of confrontational relationships between the ruling party and the governor and therefore, it is important to get a perspective on this increasing turmoil.
There is no doubt that the Bengal governor has been trying to interfere in the functioning of the state assembly. Significantly, it should be noted that Dhankhar is supposedly the only sitting governor who regularly tweets or holds press briefings against the Assembly Speaker, legislators and the chief minister.
In India, governors are appointed by the President but the Central government plays a key role in suggesting these names to him. There have been several instances where the governors have just worked as the mouth piece of the Central government. Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee is one of the strongest opponents of the BJP and the latter lost miserably in the recent assembly elections in the state. This is why political observers believe that the Bengal governor is just following the orders of the Centre.
The Speaker of the Lok Sabha or any state legislature is the head of the House. The Speaker enjoys independent and autonomous powers. Their decision in the House is sacrosanct. India’s first Prime Minister Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru had said, “In parliamentary democracy, the speaker represents the dignity and the freedom of the House and because the House represents the country, the speaker, in a way, becomes the symbol of the country’s freedom and liberty.” West Bengal Governor Jagdeep Dhankhar has not only raised questions on the role of the Speaker but has also indicated that he is working on behalf of the ruling party. Such allegations demean and defame the chair of the Speaker. And when such allegations come directly from the constitutional head of a state, it defames democracy.
Since 1952, the custom has been that the governor of the state will authorise the Speaker of the legislative assembly to administer the oath of office to legislators. Surprisingly, after the recent by-polls in Bengal where Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee won from the Bhawani pore seat, Dhankhar issued a notification and withdrew the power of the Speaker to administer the oath of office to newly elected legislators. In the recent past, this could be considered as the first and the biggest attack on the Speaker of the House by the constitutional head of a state.
Article 188, which deals with oath or affirmation of lawmakers says, “Every member of the Legislative Assembly or the Legislative Council of a State shall, before taking his seat, make and subscribe before the Governor, or some person appointed in that behalf by him, an oath or affirmation according to the form set out for the purpose in the Third Schedule.”
On January 25, standing in the assembly premises, Dhankhar slammed the Speaker and the state government in front of the media. This behaviour irked the Speaker and he informed the Raj Bhavan that the next time onwards, if the governor wanted to make unscheduled visits to the assembly, then he would have to inform the Speaker the reason for his visit. In an unprecedented response, Dhankhar responded by saying the Speaker “has conducted himself in an unconstitutional manner”. Such a judgmental response to the Speaker of the assembly is condemnable.
The post of the governor has a limited role and most of it is supervisory. According to the Constitution, no one has the right to interfere in legislative proceedings. Dhankhar has not only attacked the Speaker but also has been attacking the chief minister of Bengal from Day 1.
Under the provisions of the Constitution, the governor should act in the aid and advice of the council of ministers. The conflict between the governor and the ruling dispensation in Bengal started when the latter started taking decisions without the aid and advice of the state government. Unfortunately, Dhankhar’s attacks are not restricted to the ruling dispensation or the legislature. He has been attacking top officials of Bengal, including the chief secretary, district magistrates and the DG of Police for a long time. Following these developments, the TMC has planned to bring a resolution in the Bengal Assembly against the governor and to bring a motion against him in Parliament. This whole conflict is harming the democratic system of Bengal. There is continuous tension within every section of the administration and the legislature. Every pillar of democracy is important. The governor is the constitutional head of a state but when it comes to the legislature, he or she should not try to control the elected body. The people of the state elect their representatives with utmost faith and if they fail to deliver, then it is the work of the opposition to bring this in front of the people. The governor must not act as a representative of the opposition. Electoral democracy is the foundation of India and if constitutional heads interfere in legislative functioning, then it is nothing but a direct attack on the democratic system.
The writer is an independent journalist based in Kolkata and former policy research fellow, Delhi Assembly Research Centre. He tweets as @sayantan_gh. Views expressed are personal
