Editorial: Time to rethink system of Governors

Supreme Court’s strong strictures against Tamil Nadu Governor RN Ravi — for deliberately withholding ten Bills — should serve as a warning to the Centre over its choice of Governors for non-BJP-ruled States

The NDA government, which loses no opportunity to brag about dismantling the symbols of colonial rule, must answer the question as to why the system of Governors, also a relic of the colonial past, should be continued now. In recent years, instances of the Centre misusing the gubernatorial positions to cause pinpricks to the non-BJP States have increased multi-fold. It is time the country took up a wider national debate on the relevance of the Governor’s office at a time when it is largely used as a political tool to hurt the interests of the States. Against this backdrop, the Supreme Court’s strong strictures against Tamil Nadu Governor RN Ravi — for deliberately withholding ten Bills cleared by the Assembly — should serve as a warning to the Centre over its choice of Governors for non-BJP ruled states. In a major victory for the DMK government, the apex court has ruled that Ravi’s decision to reserve 10 Bills for the President’s consideration was illegal, arbitrary and against constitutional provisions. The overarching message is that the Governors should not let their political considerations undermine their allegiance to the Constitution. Invoking its extraordinary powers, the SC granted assent to the 10 Bills that were pending with the Governor. Article 142 of the Constitution allows the top judiciary to take over the role vested with the Governor in the law-making process. The extraordinary power to pass orders to do “complete justice” is sparingly used by the Court, especially when it involves other constitutional authorities.

In another strong message, the apex court has set clear timelines for the Governors to act on the legislative Bills. It has earmarked a one-month deadline for Governors to withhold assent to a Bill and reserve it for the President’s review with the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers. When a Bill is reserved without the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers, this deadline will be three months. If a Bill is presented to a Governor after reconsideration by the State Assembly, s/he must clear it within a month. The court has rightly observed that the members of the legislature are better attuned to the needs of the people. Creating roadblocks for political reasons does not behove the holder of a constitutional office. The Centre would also be well-advised to desist from giving Governors carte blanche to impede the functioning of State governments. The court’s ruling will, hopefully, help in restoring the much-needed balance in the Centre-State relations. The focus must be on encouraging harmonious ties between the State governments and those holding gubernatorial positions. This would ensure that the State’s all-round progress is not derailed by unsavoury rows. In recent years, the DMK government has been at loggerheads with the Governor over a number of issues, most importantly the inordinate delay in granting assent to Bills passed by the legislature.

---