[op-ed snap] Constitution day: On Fadnavis’ exit

Context

Devendra Fadnavis quit ahead of the test in the State Assembly, which may have caused imminent ouster. 

Democracy sustained

• • The government not standing is a tribute to India’s constitutional order. 
  • Supreme Court acted with the urgency to protect democratic values. 
  • It laid down the rules and timelines; ring-fenced the floor test and pre-empted manipulation. 
  • It observed that when “there is a possibility of horse-trading, it becomes incumbent upon the Court to act”.
  • The Supreme court’s order called into question the propriety and intention of the Centre and the Governor.
  • The Shiv Sena-Nationalist Congress Party-Congress alliance will test its majority after forming the government.

Misuse of rules and abuse of precedents

• • Governor – The Governor used his discretion in a partisan manner to foist the government based on dubious claims of numbers. 
    • He denied the opportunity to the coalition.
    • He is constitutionally authorized to appoint a Chief Minister. 
    • The limits of this authority are being breached with frequency and extent by partisan Governors acting as tools in political schemes. 
  • Centre – The Centre rushed through the procedure to withdraw the President’s rule.
  • Constitutional morality was violated by those entrusted to guard it. 

Way ahead

• • There is a need to define the boundaries of the Governor’s use of discretion in inviting a party to form a government.