New Delhi146;s man?

The governor must play a 8216;pro-active8217; role in the development of states, exhorted President Abdul Kalam at the two-day conference ...

The governor must play a 8216;pro-active8217; role in the development of states, exhorted President Abdul Kalam at the two-day conference of governors in the Capital over the weekend. Governors can be 8216;full fledged participants8217; in the development process, agreed Prime Minister Vajpayee from the same forum.

The sentiment is truly unexceptionable. But there is a problem here and it is this: given the long and fraught history of conflict between the occupants of Raj Bhavan and chief ministers, it sounds more like a pious platitude than a realisable ideal. It is eminently desirable that the governor should bring about 8216;unity of minds8217; but the question is: how can we ensure that governors see themselves in the role of abettors of development rather than of the political regimes that patronise them at the Centre?

The question also is: what must be done to ensure that Central governments do not use governors as tools to further their political interests in states ruled by rival parties? Until those questions are taken up, persistently and rigorously, President Kalam8217;s well-meaning call for the 8216;pro-active8217; governor will inevitably invite the uneasy suspicion of being veiled advocacy for a constitutionally undesirable gubernatorial activism.

The government at the Centre has traditionally seen the governor as its constitutionally sanctioned puppet. The examples of governors who have been accused of straying outside the line, often as a result of unsubtle string-pulling from the Centre, are a legion.

Romesh Bhandari8217;s stint in Uttar Pradesh, be it his decision to propose President8217;s rule or to dismiss the Kalyan Singh government without giving it a chance to prove its majority on the floor of the House, was seen as politically motivated. More recently, the governor of Gujarat, whose appointment had been criticised for the political credentials he sports on his sleeve, invited controversy through his quiescent silence while riots raged unchecked in the state.

Some suggestions deserve a second look. Perhaps it could be made binding on the Centre to consult the state government before appointing a governor; perhaps the final selection could be made from a panel of names. It has also been suggested that governors be given a fixed tenure and that criteria be fixed for their removal.

The governor should be 8216;eminent8217; in some walk of life, he should be a 8216;detached figure8217; who has not taken too great a part in politics, and frequent removals and transfers 8216;lower the prestige8217; of this office 8212; many years ago the Sarkaria Commission report on Centre-State Relations laid down the ground rules. It is time we began a discussion on how best to implement them.