Winking at Romesh Bhandari

Actually, Gujral shouldn’t be singled out. Can you name any person or party in the ragbag United Front who comes out well from the sordid drama in Lucknow? Or, for that matter, any Congressman?

Back in October 1997, the regional parties — the DMK, the Telugu Desam, the Asom GanaParishad — claimed that it was their respect for federalism that stopped Mulayam Singh & Co from misusing Article 356 in Uttar Pradesh. Did anyone hear Muthuvel Karunanidhi, Chandrababu Naidu or Prafulla Kumar Mahanta utter a squeak as Romesh Bhandari rode roughshod over every norm?And how about the Left? Once upon a time, Indrajit Gupta could stand up in Parliament and denounce Romesh Bhandari for steering Uttar Pradesh to “anarchy, chaos, and destruction”. Why is he hiding in Midnapore today?But silence is preferable to the chosen response of Gupta’s comrades in the CPI(M) blatant misrepresentation of facts. Harkishen Singh Surjeet’s new-found love for Bhandari was anticipated. But I was genuinely shocked when the venerable Jyoti Basu too stooped to Surjeet’s level.

What, you may legitimately ask, are the facts twisted out of shape by the Left? Shall we begin with the much misquoted “precedent” supposedly set by Governor Motilal Vora in 1995 when the Mulayam Singh ministry was dismissed?

But letme first give a brief synopsis of the famous `Bommai vs Union of India’ ruling by the Supreme Court. In that historic judgment, their lordships stated that the only place to test a Chief Minister’s majority was the floor of the House. They also said that unimpeachable evidence of violence would be required to show why such a floor-test was not applied.

Using `Bommai’ as a yardstick, let us examine Vora’s actions. When Mayawati withdrew the BSP from the coalition with Yadav on June 1, 1995, the UP Governor requested the Samajwadi Party boss to seek a fresh mandate from the House. He was given ten days to prove his strength, more than sufficient time. Mulayam Singh refused, repeat, refused, this offer. He said he preferred to wait for the scheduled Assembly session, more than a month away. Vora found this unacceptable, but didn’t dismiss him outright.

The Samajwadi Party chief used the time to organise an attack on Mayawati and sundry BSP MLAs on June 2, 1995. The ugly details are available in the RameshChandra Report, which also cited current Union Communications Minister Beni Prasad Verma’s role. (Incidentally, when these findings appeared in the media, the Samajwadi Party accused Bhandari of leaking it!)Only then did Vora dismiss the Mulayam Singh Yadav ministry. I defy any impartial observer to say that Vora didn’t abide by the letter and spirit of `Bommai’. He offered Yadav sufficient time to obtain a vote of confidence. The attack on Mayawati was evidence not just of impending violence but actual bloodshed. And the Governor didn’t cavalierly reject all advice from Rashtrapati Bhawan! Nobody would have complained had Bhandari acted half as honourably as the man he cites as setting a “precedent”. The arrogant Governor, secure in the implicit backing of the United Front, sacked Kalyan Singh forthwith without offering any time for a vote in the House.

This, by the way, was the recommendation of the Left back in October 1997. The Marxists said Bhandari should have sacked Kalyan Singh the moment Mayawatibacked out of the deal with the BJP. However, they added, Bhandari should not have recommended President’s rule once Kalyan Singh won the vote of confidence. Talk about eating your cake and having it too!

Well, whatever reservations the President and the Supreme Court may have about Bhandari’s unique interpretation of the law, Surjeet can’t complain that his advice wasn’t taken. But why on earth is Jyoti Basu, himself once a victim of gubernatorial excess, mouthing support for Bhandari?

Thirty years ago, Basu had his first experience of administration as Deputy Chief Minister in Ajoy Mukherjee’s coalition ministry. The then governor of West Bengal, Dharam Vira, sacked Mukherjee. (The Chief Minister had refused to prove his strength in the specified time.) A Congress-led ministry was hastily sworn in. But Bijoy Bannerjee, Speaker of the House, created history by adjourning the Assembly without permitting the new Prafulla Chandra Ghosh government to obtain a vote of confidence. The House, he declared, couldnot recognise a ministry formed behind its back. The CPI(M) thoroughly approved.

Imagine the roars of outrage if Speaker Tripathi were to follow in Speaker Bannerjee’s steps today! But Jyoti Basu, that icon of the bhadralok, is singing a different tune: “One law for the CPI (M), another for the BJP!”Perhaps Basu is bound to follow the party line as any good apparatchik must. But how about Chandra Shekhar, who has no such burdens to trammel him? The former Prime Minister is a man I genuinely respect, but his position is unacceptable. Chandra Shekhar deprecates criticism of Bhandari on the ground that a Governor is an officer of the Constitution. But, judging by the snippets shown on television, Shekhar seemed to be criticising the President and the Supreme Court. Aren’t they created by the Constitution?

How about the Congress? Its “inspiration” (or her ghost writer!) is silent. So are its conscience-keepers A.K. Antony and Manmohan Singh. As for the rest, I assume they were best represented by theirGeneral Secretary. Ghulam Nabi Azad’s exultant reaction to Bhandari’s mischief was to promise more of the same in Maharashtra and Rajasthan!

An immense amount of bunk has been aired about the BJP’s “fascist”, “antidemocratic”, “unparliamentary” tendencies. I urge you to go through the facts of the murky drama in Lucknow. Then judge for yourself who best deserves such epithets. Is it the party whose position has been upheld by the President and the courts? Or is it those hastily mounting the Bhandari bandwagon in a lemming rush for power?