Depoliticise speaker’s office

Of The House, For The House

By Poonam I Kaushish

It’s the season of Aya Ram Gaya Ram and prize catches. Specially in Maharashtra and Bihar where the political arena resembles a Spanish bull-ring following three Congress stalwarts ex- Chief Minister Ashok Chavan, Milind Deora and Baba Siddique dumping it. In Patna demise of JD(U)-RJD-Congress Mahagathbandhan Government and resurrection  of old BJP-JD(U) ties with “somersaulting” Nitish again Chief Minister for ninth time.

Playing Matador to hilt, the new NDA Government enacted an emotion-filled politico-drama Monday by removing Assembly Speaker RJD’s Chaudhary, who refused to step down, via a no-confidence motion prior to its trust vote. Reminiscent of 2022 when the Mahagathbandhan had got rid of BJP’s Assembly Speaker. Justified by Speaker can be removed by an Assembly resolution passed by majority.

Last month too, Maharashtra Assembly Speaker Narwekar took 18 months to rule Chief Minister Shinde with 40 MLAs was the Shiv Sena and not Thackeray’s faction, but refused to disqualify his 16 legislators, lobbing the ball back to Supreme Court.

In 2020, Jyotiraditya Scindia led 22 Congress MLAs sent their resignation to Madhya Pradesh Assembly Speaker who accepted their resignations only a day before Supreme Court ordered a floor test which culminated in Kamal Nath’s Government falling.

In July 2019 Karnataka Assembly Speaker disqualified 11 Congress and three JD(S) MLAs leading to Kumaraswamy’s Government collapse. In 2015-16 BJP had only 11 MLAs and support of 2 Independents in Arunachal but engineered defections by winning over 21 of 47 Congress MLAs in the 60-Member Assembly. The Speaker disqualified 14 MLAs, simultaneously BJP held an extraordinary session wherein rebel Congress-BJP MLAs removed the Speaker. While Gauwhati High Court upheld the disqualification, Supreme Court refused to give a verdict on disqualification but restored Congress Government in July 2016.

Ditto in Uttarakhand where Speaker disqualified 9 Congress rebel MLAs for voting against the Appropriations Bill despite them not leaving Congress or voting against it in the Assembly. The MLAs joined BJP and upstaged Congress Government in 2016.

The issue is not whether the Speaker’s decision in every case has politics written all over it or if he resigns or is removed. Nor whether a political appointee should continue to be arbitrator in legislators’ defections? Neither that Parties have used Speaker’s post as lollipop to reward and oblige a Party worker thus sounding another death knell of a Constitutional institution. But why Speaker is so important in the Constitutional scheme of things?

Primarily, as he represents the House, its dignity, freedom and liberty. According to Erskine May, “The House has no Constitutional existence without him.” He has to ensure Opposition has its say even as Government has its way and is expected to be above Party politics and not Government’s puppet.

If a Party splits, Speaker decides whether it is a “split” or defection case. His ruling is binding. By this one act he can “destroy” a Party and facilitate another’s rule. His casting vote can swing balance either way. Recall, Chandra Shekhar’s famous split which led to VP Singh’s Government fall.

Besides, his powers to use or misuse Anti-Defection Act which bestows the power of deciding whether a representative has become subject to disqualification, post their defection on the Speaker offering ample scope to him to exercise discretion and play political favourites, ignoring the letter and spirit of the Act.

Alas, its par for the course when MPs-MLAs-Speaker roles are inter-changed at a drop of a hat. Whereby, ruling Party Ministers, MPs and MLAs accept Speakership only to exploit the office for richer political dividends. Whereby, it is increasingly difficult to keep track of Minister’s becoming Speaker’s and vice versa.

From second Speaker Ayyangar who became Bihar Governor on his term’s expiry to GS Dhillon and Manohar Joshi who switched roles from Ministers to Speakers, Balram Jhakar never concealed his identity as Congressman, Rabi Ray lived up to his Janata Party’s expectation and Shivraj Patil who post Speakership, lost the re-election, but was nominated by Congress to Rajya Sabha and anointed Home Minister. In UPA I Congress Minister Meira Kumar became Lok Sabha Speaker in UPA II. Today eyebrows are not even raised.

The entirety of a Speaker’s decisions can also be an inducement for abuse. Instances of suspension of over 149 Opposition MPs from Parliament in the winter session, almost all DMK MLAs were evicted en masse from the Tamil Nadu Assembly in 2016 while protesting raise crucial questions about our democracy’s health and its democratic character.

Bringing things to such a pass, whereby a Speaker has acquired a larger-than-life image and role and has become the primus entre peri. A demi-God who can do no wrong, and whose actions are unquestionable. Forgotten in the quintessential position, is the Speaker who is essentially servant of the House has fast become its master, thanks to rules of procedure. Highlighting, falling standards in conducting legislative business in Parliament and Assemblies.

Undoubtedly, the Speaker’s position is paradoxical. He contests Parliament or State Assembly election and subsequently for the post on a Party ticket, and yet is expected to conduct himself in a non-partisan manner, all the while being beholden to the Party for a ticket for the next election. Confided a ex-Lok Sabha Speaker: “We are elected on Party tickets with Party funds. How can we claim independence? Moreover, even if we resign on becoming Speaker, we still have to go back to the Party for sponsoring our next election.”

Against this background and in our Aaya Ram Gaya Ram political milieu the Speaker’s job has not only become all important and demanding but is the cynosure of all eyes today as  the issue of having an independent Speaker is vital.

Where does one go from here? Time to look afresh at the Speaker’s powers, depoliticize his office, promote neutrality. One way is follow Britain’s Parliamentary democracy whereby a MP resigns from his Party once elected Speaker and is re-elected unopposed in subsequent elections. Two, Speaker must walk a tight rope, place himself in a judge’s position, not become partisan so as to avoid unconscious bias for or against a particular view thus inspiring confidence in all sections of the House about his integrity and impartiality.

Towards that end he has to play fair and set healthy and gracious conventions for the high Constitutional office he holds which calls for fairness, uprightness and adherence to Constitutional values and conventions.

Consequently, rules have to be drastically changed to ensure the Speaker’s Constitutional post is respected as it is sacrosanct. Legislators and Governments must desist from reducing his office in to a Constitutional extension of Government. Thereby, converting the post in to a monument like Taj Mahal or Qutab Minar. We know what pigeons do to them.

Remember, a Speaker is an honoured position, a free position and should be occupied always by men of outstanding ability and impartiality as what matters are not men but institutions.  We must recognize a Speaker’s key role in our democracy by adopting the British maxim: Once a Speaker always the Speaker.

Succinctly, the Speaker is of the House, by the House and for the House. Remember, what matters are not men but institutions. One can tit for an individual but not tat on the State. It is imperative our democracy is put back on the rails. —  INFA