Trying to play fair in RS, Govt scores self-goal

Article 355 is an emergency provision empowering the Centre to issue directions to a state affected by ‘‘internal disturbance’’ or not being governed ‘‘in accordance with the provisions of this Constitution.’’

The Supreme Court’s benchmark ruling on the subject, S R Bommai vs Union of India, held that Article 355 is ‘‘in the nature of justification for the measures to be adopted under Article 356 (dismissal of the state government and imposition of President’s Rule).’’

In other words, if the state fails to comply with the instructions issued under Article 355, then the Centre may invoke Article 356 and impose President’s Rule.

Until now, the Government has given no evidence to show that instructions have been issued to the Modi Government under Article 355.

Constitutional experts say the Centre, therefore, is being too clever by half in trying to pass off whatever official interaction it has had with Gujarat as action under Article 355.

Because this emergency provision does not cover the usual administrative control the Centre has over all the states under Articles 256 and 257. These two Articles are sufficient enough for the Centre to ensure that the state record FIRs, take action against riot-accused and provide protection to the victims.

External Affairs Minister Jaswant Singh’s claim in the Rajya Sabha that the Centre has already been acting under Article 355 has another damaging implication: that the liability for the prolonged communal violence extends beyond the Narendra Modi Government and goes all the way to Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee and Home Minister L K Advani.

That the Vajpayee Government has so far shown no sign of moving towards Article 356 suggests that the Centre is not dissatisfied with the Modi Government’s action, such as it is, on its directions under Article 355.

The Government stands exposed on another front: its opposition to the very admission of a motion under Rule 184 in the Lok Sabha.

The proceedings of the Lok Sabha were disrupted for six whole days because the Government argued against the application of Rule 184 on the grounds that Parliament had no jurisdiction over Gujarat’s law and order situation as it is a state subject.

Today’s statement contradicts the Centre’s stand in the Lok Sabha because if it had already been acting in Gujarat under Article 355, it had forfeited all its right to question Parliament’s jurisdiction to discuss the matter under Rule 184.