ELECTIONS '98
COMMENTARY
SPECIALS
INTERVIEWS
CAPITAL BUZZ
REDIFF POLL
DEAR REDIFF
THE STATES
YEH HAI INDIA!
ARCHIVES

Circle of Treason

There can be no two opinions about the extent of embarrassment that the Presidential rebuff to the Cabinet recommendation has caused to the Bharatiya Janata Party government. If K R Narayanan's earlier rejection of a similar recommendation from the Gujral government robbed an ill-conceived administration of what little authority it had to govern, his second such response, with a year's time, is far more significant.

For apparently, we were told, this was not a measure mooted by a partisan governor. This was not a decision taken by a minority government under pressure. This also was not a decision taken for purely political reasons.

On the contrary, the Union Cabinet had deliberated carefully and minutely, the pros and cons of invoking Article 356 to send the Bihar chief minister packing, never mind the unholy sight of allies, overt and covert, expressing themselves against a unanimous decision once it was taken. There was no alternative, the nation was told, to imposing central rule in a congenitally lawless state, never mind if the Bharatiya Janata Party had in the past opposed the constitutional provision under which the Centre was authorised to dismiss state governments.

And yet, the President was not convinced of the arguments levelled, the reasons given, to dismiss the Rabri Devi government. Considering that the Union Cabinet had merely endorsed the report from the governor, himself none other than an agent of the Rashtrapati, what Narayanan has done, in effect, is to express lack of faith in the political sagacity, independence, of his surrogate.

Considering that the Cabinet's decision was preceded by the governor pitching tent in the national capital, pushing his case for the dismissal of the Bihar government, it would be facile to treat the Presidential snub as routine. None other than the governor had converted the issue into a clash of personalities, of offices, and there is only one honourable way left for him if he does not want to join his namesake in the hall of political infamy.

Apart from the damage inflicted on the gubernatorial office, it is obvious that the political cost of the Bihar misadventure to the BJP is enormous. A government that is full of Gandhian rhetoric has been shown to have feet of clay, and it is always a stomach-turning sight. The BJP president's statement, that there is no point having Article 356 if the government does not have the freedom to invoke it, is only an indication of the frustration caused within the rank and file over the constitutional imbroglio.

It needs no special talent to divine that Bihar is an eyesore, was one, and will remain one. It also was not an unknown fact that the current occupant of Rashtrapati Bhavan is no pushover when it comes to maintaining constitutional niceties. He has correctly inferred that the role of a President, in an era of political coalitions, goes far beyond that envisaged by the founding fathers, when governments could be buffeted by the whims and fancies of regional satraps and be forced into situations where expediency scores over sagacity.

The government, if it wanted to, could have re-sent the Cabinet recommendation to the President, in which case he would have been duty-bound to sign on the dotted line. While it is taking the high ground by talking of avoiding a showdown with the head of state, it is clear that the decision, when it came up before the Cabinet once again, did not meet with the approval of the BJP's allies. It should be interesting to know just which ministers attended the earlier Cabinet meeting that recommended Rabri Devi's dismissal, and which attended the next one that abandoned the course of action.

To me, there are a few things that seem unusual about the Bihar episode. Like the recourse to justifying Rabri Devi's dismissal on the grounds of constitutional breakdown. Governments have been dismissed in the past for losing majority in the assembly, which is far easier to prove or otherwise, than a breakdown in law and order. Laloo Yadav may actually be steering his wife through the treacherous waters of governance, but at least he does not call himself the state's remote-control, if you know what I mean...

The other aspect was keeping the assembly in suspended animation. How much ever gloss was attempted to be put on this point, it is clear that the President was not convinced that it was not a means of forming another government in the state, a fear expressed by no less than the government's chief ally.

But to me, there were other, more unusual aspects to the impugned decision to impose President's rule in Bihar. For one, I cannot recall the last time such a crucial decision was taken in such a manner, with the prime minister flying out of the country for 10 days following it. The decision was thrust on the President immediately on his return from a foreign tour. If timing is at the core of crucial decisions, this one was palpably errant.

I cannot buy the argument that the prime minister miscalculated on this one, it is too specious and does no justice to his amassed years of parliamentary experience. At the risk of sounding hyperbolic, the prime minister's Bihar blunder is like Bill Gates not knowing how to boot a computer. It seems extremely odd to me that such a prime minister would take such a decision in such manner, while fully mindful of the consequences, unless he had an agenda of his own.

One fallout relates to the man who is batting for the government on a sticky wicket, Home Minister L K Advani, considered in many quarters as the de facto prime minister. Despite his role in the Babri Masjid demolition, despite his hawkish image, he often speaks as the voice of the government. Clearly the Sangh Parivar's choice for the top executive job in the country, he lost out to A B Vajpayee only because the latter is more acceptable because he is more moderate. Despite the apparent bon homie between the two, it sounds improbable that the PM is unfazed at the constant shadow behind him. If blame were to be laid at anyone's door for the Bihar mess, Advani has become prime candidate.

The other fallout is in Madras. Jayalalitha may have cried foul at Bihar being the first on the BJP's chopping block when she has been demanding the ouster of the Tamil Nadu government for very similar reasons, but there is no way now any government -- this one, or the next one -- will grant her wish. Tamil Nadu can never be the quid pro quo for her support now, and she may well have been silenced. The President's Bihar decision, thus, is a landmark one -- it strengthens the prime minister even while weakening his government.

How Readers reacted to Saisuresh Sivaswamy's recent columns

Saisuresh Sivaswamy