Home > 2005 Issues > September 18, 2005

Bihar : State of Lalu-Buta Lawlessness By Shyam Khosla No one questions the sincerity of the Election Commission to ensure a free and fair poll in the coming Bihar Assembly elections. The Commission has taken a series of measures, including the insistence on voters photo identity cards, to check bogus voting and other electoral malpractices. However, its decision to extend the poll process to four phases spanning over a month is likely to prove counter productive. The Commission seems to have convinced itself that a staggered poll would enable it to have a better policing. This is unlikely to happen. The past experience is that RJD's capacity to move around its storm troopers to spread terror and rig elections is far greater than the Administration's efficacy to check rigging. It is common knowledge that staggering polling dates over a large period in mid-90s had helped Lalu Yadav to rig elections and win many more seats than he otherwise would have. The then Chief Election Commissioner T N Seshan was left wondering what went wrong. The Commission's defence that the elections have been staggered because adequate number of paramilitary forces are not available defies logic. Last time round, elections where held in several states. In October-November, elections will be held only in one state. Why can't the Union Government make available to the Commission the required number of para military forces for deployment during the polling? The Election Commission is worried over the security environment in the state. It is no better under President's Rule than it was under the RJD Chief Minister. In fact, the NDA, which is a big contender for power in the state, has no faith whatsoever in the Governor who is seen as an agent of the Congress-RJD combine. It has publicly accused Buta Singh of being partisan and has mockingly asked him to campaign for the Congress and the RJD. If the Governor has lost credibility, he is to blame himself for this sorry state of affairs. True, he is not the first Governor to behave in a partisan manner at the behest of his "political masters". But he is the crudest of all those blamed for lowering the dignity of the high office. The widely held perception that the Bihar Assembly was dissolved to prevent Nitish Kumar from staking claim to form the Government has been virtually confirmed by Governor Buta Singh's two letters to the President of India recommending the dissolution of the Assembly. A careful reading of the documents that were submitted to the Supreme Court by the Union Government leaves little doubt that Buta Singh's main concern was to see that Nitish Kumar does not take over as Chief Minister. The Governor's report lacks concrete evidence to prove his presumption that allurements were being offered to MLAs to lend support to the JD(U). On the other hand, he talks about the restiveness in the LJP legislators and that of the RJD over reports that a large number of MLAs belonging to Ramvilas Paswan's party might lend support to Nitish Kumar. The Governor himself admitted that he had received reports that there was a lot of pressure by the RJD legislators on Lalu Prasad Yadav to either form the Government in the state on the UPA pattern with the support of the Congress, LJP and others or he should at least ensure the continuation of President's Rule in the state. Clearly, these considerations did persuade the Governor to recommend the dissolution of the Assembly. An additional factor may have been his own self-interest to continue as the virtual ruler of the state for a few months. His propensity to appoint his favourites to various boards and committees even after the code of conduct had come into force confirms this unfortunate perception. In his first of the two reports, that are now public property, the Governor said the General Secretary of the LJP had resigned from the party and 17-18 more LJP MLAs were perhaps "moving" towards JD(U). They were being wooed by "various means" so that a split could be effected in the LJP. If the move was to split the party, one can safely depend on Buta Singh to infer what those "means" were. Public memory is not so short to forget that the person who is now the Governor was charged with offering money to JMM MPs to win their support in the Lok Sabha for the minority Government headed by P.V. Narasimha Rao. If the allurements were being offered or money was changing hands to win over MLAs, it indeed posed a threat to the democratic set up and is totally unacceptable. But where is the proof? Where is the credible evidence barring the information supplied to the Governor by his "contacts" in the BJP and the JD(U) and the intelligence agencies? It is no better under President's Rule than it was under the RJD Chief Minister. In fact, the NDA, that is a big contender for power in the State, has no faith whatsoever in the Governor who is seen as an agent of the Congress-RJD combine. The BJP and JD(U) have taken strong exception to the Governor's reference to "contacts" in the two parties for the information about what was going on behind the scenes. They have rightly asked if it did not amount to "political espionage". Is it the job of a head of a state to have insiders in political parties to keep him informed of what was happening in the party circles? It is clearly a misuse of state machinery and intelligence agencies. Spying on political parties is not their legitimate job. BJP General Secretary Arun Jaitley has in this context raised a pertinent question namely would the Governor have acted in the same manner if the legislators were thinking of changing sides to lend support to RJD whose chief has claimed that Buta Singh was his appointee? Buta Singh's contention that the formation of a government led by Nitish Kumar would have distorted the popular mandate is laughable. What was the mandate, Mr. Govenor? Was it not against the ruling RJD as it was reduced to the second position? It was indeed a fractured mandate but the fact remains that JD-BJP combine had emerged as the single largest alliance. Heavens wouldn't have fallen if the combine were given a chance to form the Government and prove majority on the floor of the House. In the event of the alliance failing to win the confidence of the House, the Governor would have been within his constitutional right to recommend the dissolution of the Assembly. Buta Singh's claim that no one, and no one, could question his authority and reports is too presumptuous. Eminent constitutional experts have raised questions about his reports and recommendation. Noted jurist Fali Nariman is on record that the President, who was on a state visit to Moscow, shouldn't have accepted the recommendation and should have sent it back to the Government. In any case, the constitutionality of the dissolution of the Assembly has been challenged in the apex court, which has expressed its intention to deliver its judgment in the case before the polling starts in the assembly elections.

Previous Page (1/34) - Next Page (3/34)