People's Democracy

AS we go to press, the President of India has, at the behest of the union cabinet, referred the election commission's decision regarding the polls in Gujarat to the supreme court. The supreme court is likely to take up the matter early next week upon the return of the chief justice who is away from the capital.

While one will have to wait for the supreme court's opinion on the matter, it is clear that the Vajpayee government has needlessly involved the office of the President of India in its unprecedented and unhealthy confrontation with the independent Constitutional authority of the election commission. Experts believe that the Supreme Court has only three options: to return the case without hearing it (as it did with the Presidential reference on the question of whether a temple existed at Ayodhya sent by the P V Narasimha Rao government); to hear the issue and not interfere with the election commission's verdict; or, to pass judgement on the issues referred.

The presidential reference has raised three issues.

First, whether Article 324 which gives the authority to the election commission to conduct free and fair polls can supercede Article 174 which stipulates that the intervening period between two sessions of any assembly shall not be more than six months.

Secondly, in the eventuality of elections not being held in time to constitute the new assembly within six months of the last assembly sitting, can the election commission create conditions for the imposition of the president's rule under Article 356.

And, finally, should not the election commission in order to implement the provisions of Article 174 seek the union government's assistance to provide large number of security personnel to ensure that elections are held in order to meet the time frame of this Article.

It would not be appropriate to comment on the answers that the apex court may be giving on these issues. Such, however, does not seem to be the attitude of this government particularly that of the deputy prime minister who has launched a broadside against the election commission. The election commission's job, according to him, is to hold elections and not to stop them. Nowhere has the election commission in its 40-page order indicated that they are stopping the holding of elections. All that they have stated is that the prevailing conditions do not permit the holding of free and fair elections in the state of Gujarat. The Constitution of India vests this authority and judgement only upon the election commission as to whether and when free and fair elections can be held. The union home ministry and the central government has no locus standi to make such an assessment.

Thus, clearly, the Vajpayee government at the behest of the RSS is exceeding its brief and seeing a Constitutional crisis where there is none. In the process, it is seeking to undermine some of the foundational pillars of our parliamentary democracy. In their urge to capitalise on the current communal polarisation and poisonous divide in the state for the electoral benefit, they are prepared to undermine the independent authority and legal sanctity of Constitutional bodies like the election commission. In the process, they have dragged both the institutions of the president and the supreme court in a controversy of their own making.

Not to be left behind, the longstanding RSS pracharak who is now the Governor of Gujarat, S S Bhandari, has joined the bandwagon in decrying the election commission and giving unsolicited opinion that the situation in Gujarat is conducive for polls. Readers will recall that S S Bhandari was one of the four RSS pracharaks (the other three being the late Deen Dayal Upadhayay, Atal Behari Vajpayee and L K Advani) sent by the then RSS supremo M S Golwalkar to assist Shyama Prasad Mukherjee in forming the Jan Sangh. Jan Sangh was the political arm of the RSS since the RSS itself was prohibited from playing a political role following its ban after the assassination of Mahatma Gandhi. The Gujarat Governor will do well to return to his original job. If he does not do so voluntarily, he must be forced to do so.

The dismay in the RSS/BJP camp at being unable to succeed in their maneouvres to reap electoral benefits following the criminal incendiary carnage they have unleashed in Gujarat became apparent with more BJP appartichiks joining the litany of abuse against the election commission.

The party spokesman, the Gujarat chief minister, the party president -- have all displayed their frustration upon being thwarted in their cynical and diabolical effort to muster votes over the dead bodies of thousands of innocent people. They have gone to the extent of describing the election commission particularly the chief election commissioner as being not only pseudo-secular but also pseudo-democratic.

In the process, they are completely distorting both the spirit and the letter of the Constitution. As we have repeatedly pointed out in these columns earlier, Article 174(1) can be applicable only to live assemblies and not in a situation where the House has been dissolved and elections are required to constitute the new assembly. Any other interpretation will lead to absurd conclusions. Consider the fact that if a state government enjoying a clear majority in the assembly decides to recommend its dissolution five months and 20 days after its last sitting, then the Governor is bound to accept this recommendation. Can it, thus, follow that the election commission would be bound to hold elections within ten days, so that a newly constituted assembly can meet within six months of the last session? This provision, therefore, cannot be applicable, as some over-smart, lawyer-turned politicians, essentially RSS pracharaks, argue today.

Further, Article 324 clearly stipulates that it is the election commission and the election commission alone which has both the authority and the responsibility to conduct free and fair polls. This constitutional right cannot be infringed upon, under any circumstances, leave alone the present one in Gujarat. The RSS/BJP are trying their best to distort and manipulate our system of parliamentary democracy for their electoral benefits.

The election commission's order addresses the possible question that in the eventuality of the elections not being held within six months, will it lead to a constitutional deadlock, or, a breakdown? The order clearly states that the Constitution provides enough safeguards to avoid such a deadlock. In this context, the reference to Article 356 and the president's rule is mentioned. To interpret this as being tantamount to the election commission prescribing the imposition of president's rule in Gujarat borders, once again, on absurdity. Such an interpretation can only be given by those like the RSS/BJP who are distraught at their cynical maneouvres for seeking electoral profit being thwarted.

Irrespective of the supreme court's opinion on the presidential reference, the fact remains that this Vajpayee government has exposed itself as one that is bent upon subverting the Indian Constitution to further its petty electoral politics. This entire exercise is tantamount to an attempt to subvert the Indian Constitution. In a parliamentary democracy, any attempt to subvert the Constitution is tantamount to treason against the Indian republic. Those committing such acts of treason must be punished. They surely will be by the people at the first available opportunity when they are called upon to make an electoral choice.