Change the politics Rafi, JP and

Changing trends in Indian politics KshetriBimola

India is the largest democratic country in the world. The Constitution of India adopted on 26th November, 1949 declared India to be a ‘Sovereign Democratic Republic’ and to secure to all citizens Justice, Liberty, Equality and Fraternity. Later on, the words Socialist and Secular had been added. The Constitution was enforced

on 26th January, 1950 making India a newly established democratic country consisting of maximum social diversities. Elections to the House of the People (LokSabha) and Legislative Assemblies of the States were held in 1952. In both the LokSabha and the Legislatives Assemblies elections, the Indian National Congress secured majorities and formed governments at both the Centre and the States of India. Jawaharlal Nehru as a leader of the Congress party and as Prime Minister of India had exercised a great influence in the national politics as well as in the politics of the State. The Indian National Congress had been described as a dominating political party in the politics of India. Even the party system in India during the two decades i.e. 1950s and 1960s had been called as ‘one dominant party system’ or ‘one party dominant system’. The politics of India was centred round Jawaharlal Nehru and few National leaders of the Congress at the National level. The State politics was also controlled by the leaders belonging to the Indian National Congress. It may be remembered that the Indian National Congress was the ruling party at both the Union and State. The towering personality of Jawaharlal Nehru was also another factor for the political stability of the national as well as the State governments of India.

A new trend in Indian politics had emerged after the 1967 elections, both LokSabha and State Assembly elections. There was a decline in the dominating role of the Indian National Congress in some of the States in India. The formation of the non-Congress governments in more than 10 States of India had given a jolt to the dominating role of the Indian National Congress. The emergence of regional political Parties as a strong political force was also another factor affecting the dominating role of the Indian National Congress. The rise of DravidaMunnetraKazhagam in the State of Madras, now called Tamil Nadu, ShiromaniAkali Dal in Punjab,National Conference in Jammu and Kashmir had underestimated the role of the Indian National Congress in these States. These regional political parties were able to develop first as an alternative to the Congress Party and then as dominating political party by forming governments in their own States. The importance of these regional political parties was felt. When a sizable number of MPs were elected to the LokSabha, the importance of regional political parties could not be ignored in Indian politics anymore as these parties played an important role in the State politics as well as the National politics as the MPs sent from the States had become an indispensable one in the formation of coalition government at the Centre.

Another important change in the Indian politics was caused by defection. India had experienced defection as early as 1948 when some Congressmen left the Party due to factionalism. In 1951 Acharya J.P. Kripalani and Rafi Ahmed Kidwani also left the Congress party and formed the KisanMazdoorPraja Party without resigning from the Congress. In the first phase, defection was a one way traffic because they were mostly from the Congress party. None of the State Governments were affected by defection. The main reason for the defection was ideology and not to defeat the government or for personal benefit and political advantage. The second phase of defection had started after the Parliamentary and Assembly elections, 1952. In the Assembly elections, none of the political parties could win majority in Madras, Travancore, Cochin, Orissa and PEPSU (Patiala and East Punjab States Union). The Congress was the single largest party in these States. So the Governor had invited the leaders of the Congress party to form the government. The Chief Ministers then started to get the support of other members to secure majority in the Legislative Assembly. They were successful in persuading some of the non-Congress Legislators to join the Congress Party. In Orissa in 1957, Rajasthan and Madhya Pradesh in 1962, the Chief Ministers belonging to the Congress party had managed defections to enjoy majority in the Legislative Assembly. This phase of defection from 1952 to 1967 was a two way traffic in the sense that there were defections from the opposition to the Congress party and vice versa. Because of defection, as many as four State Governments ruled by the Congress party had to resign. The States were PEPSU in 1952, Andhra in 1954, and Kerala in 1956 and 1964 respectively. One interpretation was that defection was a source of political stability as it happened in Madras, Orissa, Rajasthan and Madhya Pradesh where the government could complete their full term of five years. There was more defection from the opposition to the Congress Party rather than defection from the Congress party to the opposition. And majority of the defectors were independents.

The third phase of defections, 1967 to 1972 was the most important differing from the early phases. The number of defectors was much larger than the early phase which might have been due to the formation of non-Congress government is more than 10 States in India. It has been pointed out that in 1967 alone as many as 438 legislators had defected twice in a single day by some legislators. Due to factional politics and lure of office, many Congress legislators defected to the opposition parties. The Communist Party of India (Marxist) was the only party not touched by defections. During this period, eight defectors became Chief Ministers by forming alliance with non-Congress parties. Mention may be made of RaoBirendra Singh in Haryana, Ch. Charan Singh in UP, G.N. Singh in Madhya Pradesh and BholaPaswanShastri in Bihar became Chief Ministers by defecting from the Congress Party. On the other hand, L.Singh Gill in Punjab, P.C. GHosh in west Bengal, Satish Prasad Singh, B.P. Mandal in Bihar formed government with the support of the Congress party after defecting from the non-Congress parties. Many defectors were rewarded with ministerial berths and other political benefits. Coalition ministries having more than six partners were seen in the State politics of India.

They had nothing in common except hatred of the Congress party. Minority Governments consisting of defectors and supported by some parties from outside came into existence. This happened in Haryana, Punjab, West Bengal and Bihar.

The State politics during the period 1967-1972 was characterised by political instability. Within a period of four years as many as thirty two State governments fell in ten States of India and twenty two times President’s Rule had been imposed. Due to the political instability, there was a mid-term Assembly election in seven States. In this emerging trend of political instability, the Governors had to play a key role in the politics of the State. Before 1967, the Governors did not play any significant role. But after 1967, the Governors had started to play by taking note of defections and advised the Chief Ministers to prove his majority support in the Assembly. In some States, the Governors just ignored the defections, allowing the Chief Minister to remain in office without asking to prove his majority support in the Assembly. In some States like West Bengal, the Governor dismissed the ministry under Article 172(2)(b). The Government headed by Ajoy Mukherjee was dismissed in 1967 by DharamVira, the then Governor. This was done as the Chief Minister was not prepared to prove his majority within the time specified by the Governor. There were also cases where the Governors had recommended the imposition of President’s Rule to remove a particular ministry. The Governor sometimes prorogued the session of the Legislative Assembly to save a ministry. When no political party secured majority, the Governor had to make assessment to find out who has a majority in the Legislative Assembly in some States. The practice of inviting the leader of the single largest party to form government was followed by the Governors when no party secured majority in the Assembly. There were also cases of some Governors exercising their powers in a partisan manner, thus inviting criticisms against the office of the Governors. There were suggestions even to abolish the office of the Governor in the States. The report of the Rajamannar Committee had recommended that the arbitrary powers of the Governors should be curbed.

(Articles of the author can also be accessed online on her personal blog http://kshetribimola.blogspot.com).