Cabinet nod to President’s Rule in Arunachal Pradesh, Congress fumes

The Union Cabinet, at an unscheduled meeting on Sunday that was chaired by Prime Minister Narendra Modi, took the decision to recommend imposition of President’s Rule in Arunachal Pradesh. This comes after much political drama in the state triggered by the defection of MLAs from the Congress and then judicial intervention.

The Cabinet also recommended that the state Assembly be kept in suspended animation. MoS home Kiren Rijiju said the decision came in the backdrop of the Assembly session not being held in the past six months. He said there was a constitutional crisis and that people in the state were suffering.

The Congress, however, reacted sharply to the decision and claimed democracy was being trampled upon. “Mr Modi is the fountainhead of political intolerance,” said the party. Arunachal CM Nabam Tuki said such a decision in a sensitive border state was “unprecedented” and called it “unacceptable”. Mr Tuki said governor Jyoti Prashad Rajkhowa had recommended President’s Rule without consulting the state Cabinet at a time when several cases were sub judice, pending in the Supreme Court.

Constitutional experts claimed though that there was no option before the Centre but to impose President’s Rule as the mandatory constitutional arrangement of holding an Assembly session within six months had lapsed.

The crisis arose after the Supreme Court on January 14 referred to a Constitution Bench a slew of petitions arising out of certain orders passed by the Gauhati high court in the ongoing political battle in Arunachal Pradesh. A bench comprising Justices J.S. Khehar and C. Nagappan said the matters pertained to constitutional provisions on the rights of the governor, Speaker and deputy speaker and hence had to be decided by a larger bench. The counsel for Mr Nabam Rebia, who was allegedly removed by 14 rebel Congress and BJP MLAs from the Speaker’s post, the deputy speaker and governor agreed with the suggestion of the Supreme Court bench that the matter be heard by a five-judge Constitution Bench.

The bench had also allowed Mr Rebia to take back his plea filed against an administrative order of the acting chief justice of the Gauhati high court. Mr Rebia, who had challenged in the Gauhati high court various decisions of the governor and deputy speaker, including his removal from the Speaker’s post, had alleged that the high court’s acting chief justice had “erroneously rejected” his plea, filed on the judicial side, in an administrative capacity.

Sunday’s Union Cabinet decision drew a mixed reaction in Itanagar, with some people welcoming it, anticipating the smooth functioning the government that had been completely paralysed since the political crisis started.