Governor vs CM.

Byline: A.G. Noorani

KERALA Governor Arif Mohammad Khan has deliberately set himself on a collision course with Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan ever since the distinguished historian Irfan Habib rebuked him at the Indian History Congress. But the issues he has raised should be considered on their merits. They concern the right of the head of a state in a parliamentary system to be informed of the affairs of the state by the head of the elected government.

Article 167 of the Indian constitution says: 'It shall be the duty of the chief minister of each state (a) to communicate to the governor of the state all decisions of the council of ministers relating to the administration of the affairs of the state and proposals for legislation; (b) to furnish such information relating to the administration of the affairs of the state and proposals for legislation as the governor may call for; and (c) if the governor so requires, to submit for the consideration of the council of ministers any matter on which a decision has been taken by a minister but which has not been considered by the council.'

It is an exact replica of Article 78 which defines the prime minister's duties towards the president. They codify the conventions that govern the relations between the Queen and her prime minister in the UK. Beneath those conventions lie a political culture which demands discretion, decency and rectitude.

The present controversy is a repeat, in a worse form, of that which developed in 1987 between president Zail Singh and prime minister Rajiv Gandhi (from whose cabinet A.M. Khan resigned). The president's right to know became enmeshed in a wider plot and remained unresolved until Singh demitted his office as president.

The Kerala governor was sent to make things difficult.

Relations between Zail Singh and Rajiv Gandhi soured first; the issue of the former's right to know arose later. In A.M. Khan - though it is hard to keep track of the political parties he joined and left - the BJP found one of its few Muslim poster boys. His appointment as governor of a state ruled by a party opposed to the BJP was itself wrong. He was sent to make things difficult for the Kerala government, a pattern followed in all states ruled by non-BJP parties.

Distrust grew as a consequence of Rajiv Gandhi's arrogance and ineptitude, and Zail Singh's ambition and passion for intrigue. Amendments to the postal bill provided a flashpoint. Singh argued that it violated the right to...