Opinion President’s crucial role

R Venkataraman had doubts about the proposal of the VP Singh government to create additional posts of Joint Election Commissioners and asked the government to reconsider its proposal. The government modified its proposal in light of the President’s misgivings. President K R Narayanan had strong reservations about the contemplated move of the NDA government for imposition of President’s rule in Bihar. As Attorney General,I had a meeting with President Narayanan. Thereafter,I conveyed to Prime Minister Vajpayee that the President’s reservations were cogent and President’s rule in Bihar would be constitutionally vulnerable in view of the Supreme Court’s judgment in the Bommai case. Thereafter,the proposal was happily dropped.

There are some areas judicially recognised in which the President can act according to his individual judgment,viz. (a) dismissal of the government which has lost its majority; (b) request for dissolution of the House; (c) the choice of the Prime Minister. In the last case,the principle to be borne in mind is that the person chosen would be able to provide a government with reasonable prospect of stability. This is a crucial area for the exercise of the President’s individual judgment which requires complete objectivity uninfluenced by political considerations.

Pranab Mukherjee has been in the thick of party politics for the better part of his political life. Apprehensions are expressed about his objectivity and fairness in the matter of choice of the Prime Minister in case of a fractured electoral verdict in 2014. These apprehensions are premature. Consider the example of the appointment to the Supreme Court of Justice Krishna Iyer,a former minister in the Namboodiripad Communist government in Kerala. I,along with other lawyers in Bombay,had publicly opposed Krishna Iyer’s appointment. And we were proved wrong by Krishna Iyer’s judicial pronouncements which betrayed no trace of Marxism but a strong attachment to our constitutional values and social justice.

A person grows with the office he occupies. President Mukherjee after his election is no longer a member or minister in the government. He is the President of the people of India. We can count on President Mukherjee discharging his functions objectively,uninfluenced by partisan political considerations but with the sole resolve to preserve,protect and defend the Constitution in keeping with his oath of office.

Masculine force against molesters

The shameful incident of molestation of a young girl in Guwahati has generated a furious blame game. Quite a few have blamed the police for its lack of swift action,its inability to ward off the molesters and to swiftly arrest them. The TV journalist who recorded the incident is blamed by some for instigating the molestation. To inject hilarity in the tragic situation,the girl victim is blamed for her frequenting the bar and her subsequent behaviour. Blame squarely lies on the men who not only failed to come to the girl’s rescue but apparently enjoyed the scene with a perverted sense of delight. It is often reported that when incidents of rape or molestation take place in the open,numerous males nonchalantly pass by. What has happened to Indian men? Are they scared or just not bothered so long as the victim is not their wife,daughter or sister? I distinctly recall when two fellow college students and I confronted a hefty man who was pestering a young girl in a B-1 route bus in Bombay. We rang the bell to stop the bus and with the help of the conductor and the driver threw the brute out of the bus. That was in 1951. Surely Indian manhood has not taken a dip since then. If it has,it should be invigorated. No molester should get away unscathed with his ribs and bones intact.