Play by the book

Ram Jethmalani, although a minister in the present cabinet, even went on record strongly expressing his disagreement with seeking such judicial intervention. In fact, most experts agreed that since in this case the Constitution was very clear that the proclamation of President’s rule had to be ratified by both Houses within two months of it coming into force, and the Supreme Court judgment on Article 356 in the Bommai case had only reiterated this, going to the courts would amount to a digressive tactic dictated by political expediency.

Technically, of course, the Vajpayee government can always seek to buy time by allowing the Bill to lapse two months after it came into force on February 12. This is precisely what Sushil Modi and other BJP leaders in Bihar would like the Centre to do. But such a course would amount to following the letter of the law while violating its spirit.

It would appear that the government is willfully by-passing and belittling the UpperHouse, a charge that it has already had to face in its handling of the Prasar Bharati Bill last year. Besides, there is the problem of the vote-on-account budget for Bihar, which would have to be approved by Parliament almost immediately if the state continues to be under President’s rule.

All this makes for a very confused scenario. When the BJP government had moved for President’s rule in February, it had banked on Congress support. Subsequent events proved how wrong it was on presuming this. Getting the resolution ratified by the Lok Sabha on February 26, is clearly only half the battle. Now it will have to decide how to deal with the Upper House.

Clearly, if Vajpayee and his colleagues wish to emerge from this situation with their honour and commitment to Constitutional principles intact, there is only one option before them: revoke President’s rule, given their inability to pass the concerned Bill in the Rajya Sabha.