'It's a great victory for Constitutionalism and the rule of law,' says lawyer Vivek Tankha, who appeared on behalf of deposed Arunachal Pradesh chief minister Nabam Tuki.
On Wednesday, July 13, a five-judge Constitution bench of the Supreme Court, headed by Justice J S Khehar, set aside Arunachal Pradesh Governor Jyoti Prasad Rajkhowa's message directing that the assembly session be brought forward from January 14, 2016, to December 16-18, 2015, and the manner of the session was conducted.
The bench also ordered that the status quo ante as prevailed on December 15, 2015 be restored in the Arunachal Pradesh assembly -- which in effect restored the government of Chief Minister Nabam Tuki.
Justice Khehar said the governor's order dated December 9, 2015, advancing the assembly session was violative of Article 163 read with Article 174 of the Constitution and as such was liable to be quashed.
In their separate but concurrent judgments, Justice Dipak Misra and Justice Madan B Lokur stated that while they do not disagree with Justice Khehar's view, they felt the governor's conduct should not only be impartial but should appear to be perceptibly impartial.
The Tuki-led government was dismissed after 21 of the 47 Congress MLAs rebelled against him. Arunachal Pradesh was placed under President's rule on January 26.
On February 20, rebel Congress leader Kalikho Pul was sworn in as the chief minister with the support of 18 dissident Congress MLAs, two Independent MLAs and 11 Bharatiya Janata Party MLAs who gave the government support from outside in the 60-member assembly.
Lawyer Vivek Krishna Tankha, left, a Congress member of the Rajya Sabha, is on cloud nine after the Supreme Court restored the dismissed Congress government in Arunachal Pradesh. Tankha, along with senior Congress leader and lawyer Kapil Sibal, appeared on behalf of the Tuki government.
"They (the government) may not like the verdict, but they have no choice," Tankha told Rediff.com's Syed Firdaus Ashraf in a telephone interview.
How do you see the Supreme Court judgment restoring the Nabam Tuki government in Arunachal Pradesh?
It's a great victory for Constitutionalism and the rule of law. It is not just for the Congress party, but the verdict is for upholding Constitutional ideals.
The way the BJP rocked the state government and misused the office of the governor has been exposed by the Supreme Court.
The court has not only set aside the direction from the governor which was issued on December 9, but also set aside the entire proceedings of the legislature held in a makeshift manner on December 16 and 17.
The Supreme Court has restored the status quo ante and it is a huge thing.
I can only say we are proud of our judiciary.
What is the message to the Modi government from this verdict? Will it have an impact on Centre-state relations?
The message to the Modi government is that just because you have won elections and have a majority in Parliament, you cannot ride roughshod over everybody including the Opposition, judiciary, rule of law and the Constitution. Your behaviour has to be constitutionally (correct). This is the message for everybody.
The judgment is not only for the Congress party, but for posterity.
After the Uttarakhand setback, where too attempts to unsettle the Congress government were made, this is the second time the Supreme Court has intervened to restore democracy. Do you think the executive is overstepping its limits?
It is apparent, in the face of the record, from the way it has happened. The BJP just overtook the Arunachal Pradesh government as if it did not exist.
The governor, the way he rocked the boat of the sitting government and virtually encouraged defections and horse-trading -- you are a Constitutional emissary!
In a sense it is a sad chapter for Indian democracy, but the happy thing is that the Supreme Court has stepped in and they have reassured the people through this judgment that the rule of law prevails in the country.
Twenty-one out of 47 Congress legislators defected, which is in accordance with the provisions of the anti-defection law. Does this verdict then nullify the anti-defection law?
Right now the only thing that will happen is they will have to restore the government, the Constitutional process will follow (later).
They should have waited for the Constitutional process. What was the abject need to do all this at that time? You convene, prepone the assembly in a makeshift arrangement like in some primary school or college.
Has this ever happened in any part of the world? It is a huge setback for the BJP government.
Is this the first time that the Supreme Court has called a sitting government unConstitutional?
Yes, as far as I remember this is the first time the Supreme Court has called a sitting government unConstitutional.
Since it is a Constitutional bench judgment, it has also clarified lots of Constitutional issues. The power of the governor to issue directions, the power of the governor to issue messages, the power of the governor to prepone assembly sessions without consulting the government -- all these issues have been dealt with in this judgment.
What message does this send to the Arunachal Pradesh governor, Jyoti Prasad Rajkhowa, as well as others?
If I was in his place, I would have resigned.
Has the institution of governor outlived its utility, in your opinion?
In fact, when governors were originally appointed, they were people of high stature who acted as counsellors for the government. They used to counsel the government so it could run well.
Today you have governors to disrupt the government. Their role has changed.
Finance Minister Arun Jaitley had said the Supreme Court was intervening too much in matters of governance. Will this verdict lead to further such charges from the executive?
The judiciary has done is what it is expected to do as per the Constitution and law. It has heard the adjudicated matter which was in its domain.
They (the government) may not like the verdict, but they have no choice because this judgment is from the Supreme Court of India.
