Mute Spectator : Bargaining Federalism
January 16, 2020
Nitish
Kumar, the Chief Minister of Bihar, is the latest addition to the group of CMs
who have shown apprehensions to the NRC exercise and in extension the CAA. It is
interesting that even members of the National Democratic Alliance (NDA) camp
and others who voted in favour of the bill are trying to hold back now- seems
like they’re dancing to the tune of the present. Is it actually possible for
the states to stop the center from conducting the NRC? Is it moral for the
parties to backtrack their previous commitment in the parliament?
Legal woes
The
answer to the first question is straightforward. No! States cannot stop the
central government from conducting the NRC exercise however illogical and
un-practical it might be.
Let’s
delve into what the constitution has to say about this. On items regarding
citizenship, the parliament can amend the constitution with a simple majority,
i.e, like it passes an ordinary bill. It does not need the consent of the
states nor even a special majority of the total membership of the houses. The NRC
process derives its legitimacy from the 2003 amendment to the Citizenship act 1955. Therefore along with
the latest amendment to the Citizenship act, the processes specified need not
be consented with the states.
Now
to the actual problem, article 365 of the Indian constitution explains that if
the states fail to comply with the directions of the union government, the
president can dissolve the state ministry and take powers in his own hands
which essentially transfers power to the central government. History has many
such episodes of the center abusing article 365 left and right. It will be interesting
to see if things really get that far because the Prime Minister passionately
condemned and blamed the previous governments for abusing article 365 and 356
on the parliament floor last year.
Question of Morality
Politics
is the act of balancing morality and
pragmatic approach. An idealist has no place in electoral politics because
negotiations and compromises are at the core of good politicking. Being practical
is not always immoral but to be practical at times of intense emotional fervor
requires wisdom. One is bound to seem, at least by one side as immoral when
emotions blur out rational fault lines in the quake of the political landscape.
Backtracking
the earlier commitments can be seen as immoral or as practical necessity. The parties
which reversed their opinion on the NRC exercise seem to have taken cue from
the spontaneous leaderless protests that has erupted throughout India. The legitimacy
or need of those protests is an entirely different question but the fact that
there is some visible cloud of ambiguity and fear among the public warrants the
government to clear the air.
Here,
backtracking is the balance between morality and practical approach because
heeding to the public and changing opinions accordingly is the essence of
people’s democracy. The state governments which have openly spoken against the
NRC therefore have legitimized the wave of dissent which requires the central
government to take things more seriously and look for ways to compromise or to
at least reach out to the dissenters for a productive dialogue. Now, the states
which backtracked seem like they have taken the moral choice of going against the central government which they once
held as supreme. Is backstabbing moral?
The changing subjective moralism is one to brood over, after all what is morality but a hued prism of changing
realities.
Power Game
Veteran
journalist Shekhar Gupta opines that the backtracking states are experiencing buyer’s remorse. The parties which voted
in favour of the bill are regretting that they couldn’t foresee the magnitude
of dissent it warranted. Be it opportunism or well-meaning strategy, the backtracking
parties have found their power in the otherwise one sided coalition.
Out
of the 336 Lok Sabha seats won by the NDA coalition last year, 303 seats were
from BJP itself. This makes the other members of the coalition irrelevant in
the national stage. But the federal structure looks much different. BJP does
not rule in as much states as it did back in 2018, even in states of NDA
coalition, the parties have asserted their stand against the exercise. So there
are only six states which would go on with the NRC namely Haryana, Himachal-Pradesh,
Uttarakhand, Uttar-Pradesh, Gujarat and Karnataka with the three northern
states having minimal to zero Muslim population. The remaining state
governments except the North East (they have their own reasons for NRC) have
declared or hinting that they would not conduct the NRC exercise.
All
this is plain rhetoric when it comes to constitutional methods of accepting
what the center says, but this type of rhetoric is very essential in a quasi-federal
state. If the state governments wield power strong enough to bargain their essential and local needs
in the same manner, it would provide legitimacy to the federal principles that
we say we follow. Asserting strong positions provide confidence and capacity to
the states with which they can check the overflowing power of the BJP.
Federal in Spirit
State
governments should be vigil of their position in the political landscape to bargain
and decentralize as much power required for the federal system to thrive and
enhance the lives of the citizens other than a central hand engineering the country like it is some
kind of fixed machinery.
Political
scientist KC Wheare opined that India is a “Unitary
state with subsidiary federal features rather than a federal state with
subsidiary unitary features”. This outlook can be changed if states take
the initiative in negotiating better sharing of powers among the governments. This
can only be done when states can hold back against the pressure of a giant
center with a humongous majority thereby asserting themselves as a capable
contender of political power dynamics which may in turn provide the necessary
mileage for the marathon towards a federal society not just in mere words but
also in spirit.
By Benolin
Mute Spectator is the primary series of the blog where we express our
opinions on current affairs.
0 comments