Governor-government battle in Tamil Nadu takes a turn for the worse

Governors and state governments run by the opposition going on a collision course are increasingly on the rise, but what the Tamil Nadu assembly witnessed on the first day of the session will go down in the history of Indian democracy as unprecedented. Several elements made the day dramatic: Guv’s move to delete portions from the prepared speech and add his bit, a quick resolution by the chief minister in protest, and a walkout by the former. Currently sitting on two dozen bills the assembly passed, the governor has taken the tussle to the point of no immediate return.

As someone who always raised concerns about TN’s law-and-order situation, he chose to omit a line that glorified the state as a haven of peace. But what has stumped many is his ‘discretionary’ power to skip a vital assertion that the state government is founded on the ideals of social justice, inclusive growth, equality and secularism. He also left out another important declaration that following the principles and ideals of stalwarts like E V Ramasamy, B R Ambedkar, Kamarajar, Annadurai and Karunanidhi, the government has been delivering the much-acclaimed Dravidian model of governance to its people.

It has thrown up a huge debate on the role of governors. Do they have the right to add and delete parts of the customary speech, which is a vision statement of the government? In 2018, the then Kerala governor P Sathasivam avoided certain portions of the budget speech, which appeared to be critical of the Central government and the ruling party. The speaker subsequently ruled that portions the Guv skipped would be considered read. After creating a massive fire and smoke, the controversy died a slow natural death. In 2020, Kerala governor Arif Mohammad Khan too went past his brief. The state government was at loggerheads with both Sathasivam and Khan.

Some governors are unwilling to go by convention and old practices. The fact is that a governor’s discretionary powers are scattered in the Constitution and are not codified. They derive their powers from Article 163 of the Constitution. But in the Ram Jawaya Kapur vs State of Punjab case, the apex court has elucidated the Constitutional position of the governor. He is the head of the executive in the state, but it is virtually the council of ministers in each state that carries on the executive government. A Governor’s duty is defined by constitutionality and the oath of office.