Governors are making headlines for all the wrong reasons once again. The latest in this series is West Bengal Governor CV Ananda Bose. On July 12, the West Bengal administration petitioned the Supreme Court, contesting the decision of Governor Ananda Bose not to sign eight bills into law. Astha Sharma, the state’s attorney, asked the court to list the plea for prompt consideration.
The row started when the governor rejected these bills without providing an explanation, leading the Trinamool Congress-led government to claim that this conduct violates Article 200 of the Constitution. The state’s submission claims that rejecting bills without a reason compromises democratic governance. “The governor’s oversight poses a threat to democratic governance and infringes upon the rights of the state,” argued the state’s attorney. Responding to the development, the Chief Justice of India said that the Supreme Court would consider the matter.
Similarly, in Kerala, Tamil Nadu, and other non-BJP-ruled states, governors have been sitting on bills for years, compelling these states’ governments to approach the courts. Due to this overbearing attitude of governors, non-BJP states are grappling with the inertia of governance. For example, the Kerala state assembly has passed eight bills that are gathering dust at Raj Bhavan, with three pending for nearly two years.
Governors have violated constitutional provisions by meddling in issues pertaining to elected state governments. The main points of conflict include the selection of chief ministers, determining the timing for proving legislative majorities, demanding information about day-to-day administration, delaying assent to bills, reserving bills for the President, critiquing specific state government policies, and abusing the governor’s power as chancellor of state universities.
Criticizing the governor’s office, CPI(M) MP John Brittas said that in the last ten years under the Modi government, governors have become “Governor-Generals” of the colonial era. “Recent events have called the very nomenclature of these positions into question. Maybe the Narendra Modi government should rename its governors ‘Governor Generals,’ as many have already donned the mantle of de facto rulers,”Brittas said.
The assertion of cooperative federalism, a fundamental pillar of governance in India, has been a recurring theme for Prime Minister Modi. However, his actions demonstrate a disparity between words and reality. Appointed by the Union government, governors have often played a pivotal role in upsetting the governments of states held by opposition parties. The case in point is Uttarakhand, Maharashtra, and Madhya Pradesh. When the Congress Party emerged as the single largest legislative party in the 2017 assembly elections in Goa and Manipur, the governors of these respective states denied it the right to form a government.
Most governors have a BJP-RSS background, often being BJP second-rank leaders, with their main qualification being their loyalty to the ruling party and the RSS. CPI(M) general secretary SitaramYechury states, “For Narendra Modi and Amit Shah, the choice of governors is from a pool of loyal party functionaries, RSS swayamsewaks, and pliable retired bureaucrats and generals. The governors appointed to the non-BJP-ruled states in the past few years have shown themselves to be agents of the ruling party, or worse, political henchmen.”
The Modi administration’s appointment of six new governors last year revealed its view and cynical abuse of the role. One appointee, CP Radhakrishnan, a former BJP MP from Tamil Nadu, expressed his slavish gratitude to ruling party leaders upon being appointed governor of Jharkhand. Given his servile gratitude, his behavior as governor is equally predictable.
Just two months after retiring from the Supreme Court, Justice S. Abdul Nazeer was appointed governor of Andhra Pradesh, a prime example of how the Modi government uses this sinecure position. Justice Nazeer was part of the bench that rendered a unanimous decision in the 2019 Ayodhya dispute case, leading many to view this nomination as a quid pro quo.
The Modi government also has a questionable record of nominating retired Chief Justice of India, P Sathasivam, as the governor of Kerala in 2014. Retired judges and jurists criticized this action as a danger to judicial independence. Punjab governor BanwarilalPurohit’s letter to Chief Minister Bhagwant Mann, challenging the state government’s decision-making process for selecting principals of schools sent overseas for training, exemplifies this overbearing mentality.
BJP-appointed governors are continuously abusing the ceremonial position of governor, from refusing to read portions of the governor’s speech to the state legislature to calling in senior officers and giving them orders, publicly criticizing the political stances of the state’s ruling party, and refusing to sign pending bills.
Regarding West Bengal Governor Ananda Bose, apart from sitting on bills, he has been mired in other controversies. West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee criticized him for the delay and confusion over the swearing-in ceremony of two newly-elected Trinamool Congress legislators, S Sayantika Banerjee from Baranagar and ReyatHoussen Sarkar from Bhagawangola, stating that “women are scared to go to Raj Bhavan.” In response, Bose said that “Raj Bhavan neither cares for the absurd machinations nor deems it appropriate to respond to waste-bin material.”
The appointment of vice-chancellors has also become a contentious issue between the governor and the state government, affecting the functioning of 24 universities in the state. The Supreme Court appointed a search-and-selection committee headed by former CJI UU Lalit to recommend a panel of names for appointments.
Additionally, a contractual female employee at Raj Bhavan accused the West Bengal governor of molesting her on two separate occasions. She alleged that the governor sexually harassed her on March 24 and May 2, when he summoned her to his chamber under the pretext of offering her a permanent job. The Kolkata Police is probing the molestation charges against the governor.
According to the Constitution of India, the governor acts as a key link between the Union and state governments. However, since the BJP’s rise to power in 2014, the governor’s institution has become contentious and overtly political. The role of governors, entrusted with upholding the principles of democracy and federalism, is now under intense scrutiny. CPI(M) leader SitaramYechury called on all non-BJP-run state governments to come together to demand an end to the unconstitutional acts of governors, which are encouraged and abetted by the Union government.