President vs SC revives the federalism fault line

The Centre cheers cooperative federalism, but governors in states under non-BJP parties have often been on a confrontation path with elected governments

Federalism has been a fault line of Indian politics and the DMK, which grew out of a mass movement that emphasised regional and linguistic identity, has been an advocate of the federal rights guaranteed in the Indian Constitution. It is from this ground that Tamil Nadu Chief Minister MK Stalin has written to CMs of eight states with non-BJP governments to “evolve a coordinated legal strategy” and “present a united front” in light of the Presidential reference on the landmark verdict that the Supreme Court delivered on April 8, setting deadlines for the President and governors to clear the bills passed by the state legislatures. On May 13, President Droupadi Murmu raised 14 questions before the Supreme Court on the constitutionality of the apex court’s judgment on federal rights.

The Constitution is silent on timelines for gubernatorial and Presidential action on state bills, though it was not written with the view that Governors and the President would keep state bills pending (Hindustan Times)

The Court’s ruling came in a case filed by Tamil Nadu against state governor, RN Ravi. So, it is not surprising that CM Stalin is trying to build a “united front” to safeguard the gains of the April 8 order. In his letter to the CMs, Stalin framed the Presidential reference as a political act of the Centre with no legal standing. The response of other non-BJP CMs and how the case pans out will be keenly watched for the outcome it will have on the federal balance in the polity. The Constitution is silent on timelines for gubernatorial and Presidential action on state bills, though it was not written with the view that Governors and the President would keep state bills pending.

This is a political battle in which the Court has become a party. While the BJP at the Centre has been a votary of cooperative federalism, the office of the governor in states under non-BJP parties has often been on a path of confrontation with the elected government — the Tamil Nadu case was built on the fact that Governor Ravi refused to sign on at least 10 bills despite the state legislature re-enacting them. Gubernatorial overreach impinges on governance and, in the long run, upsets the very necessary federal balance in the polity.