More Than Just an Address
Context:
- Due to differences about the speech’s content, Tamil Nadu’s governor R N Ravi recently left the state legislature during his inaugural speech.
About the address:
- At the beginning of each year’s first session of Parliament, the President is required by Article 87 of the Indian Constitution to make a special speech to both Houses that are in session. The President must inform the Parliament of the purpose for the request for the meeting.
- Similar to this, Article 176 requires that the Governor give a special statement to both Houses at the beginning of each State Legislative Assembly every year whenever the State also has a Legislative Council. The language of these clauses was directly copied from the House of Commons’ rules.
- Jawaharlal Nehru asserted in the Lok Sabha in 1960 that the President’s address is nothing more than a statement of the government’s agenda. “If there is something wrong or unpleasant in the President’s address, it is the government that is to fault, not the President,” he added, adding that “honourable Members are free to criticise or denounce government because there is some such statement in it that they disapprove of.”
- The Calcutta High Court ruled in the Syed Abdul Mansur Habibullah case (1966) that the special address is more than just a ceremonial politeness. It updates the members on the legislative and executive agendas of the State government. The High Court added that the absence of the special address hinders parliamentary debates and budgetary objections.
About the Address of Governor in India:
- Both the United Kingdom and India have a long-standing constitutional tradition that the speech or special address that announces the policies that an elected administration proposes to pursue to the nation or the State must be read precisely by the King, the President, or the Governor. There has never been an instance in the United Kingdom where the monarch changed the content of his address.
- The Governor of Tamil Nadu, R.N. Ravi, made constitutional history in the State by omitting some lines and departing from the official text of his special address during the opening of the Legislative Assembly of Tamil Nadu for 2023.
- It’s interesting that during the discussions in the Constituent Assembly, Professor K.T. Shah proposed amending Article 87 to allow the President to address “other particular policy concerns he considers acceptable for such address” as well. This amendment was rejected due to B.R. Ambedkar’s contention that in order for the President to address either or both Houses of Parliament at the same time under Article 86, Parliament must be in session.
- The Governor was given comparable power under Article 175 of the Constitution. Therefore, when an independent power is constituted pursuant to Article 175 of the Constitution, it would be extremely wrong for any Governor (or even the President) to omit significant paragraphs from the address made by the existing administration.
- The guiding principles of the Constitution have been deemed by the Supreme Court to be just as significant as its text. Furthermore, it is commonly acknowledged that sustaining constitutional morality means abiding by both constitutional customs and the Constitution’s actual text. By filling in the gaps left by a written Constitution, these agreements encourage effective cooperation between the legislative, executive, and judicial arms of government.
- Article 361 of the Constitution provides the governor with complete immunity from any legal action since our founding fathers intended for governors to meet the highest standards of decency and appropriateness. It is concerning that governors routinely flout crucial constitutional tenets in states where opposition parties are in power.
- In Manipur and Goa, the single largest party was not invited to form a government; in Tamil Nadu, bills passed by the elected legislature were purposefully delayed; in Kerala, the Governor and the ruling party are still at odds; and in West Bengal, the Governor and the ruling party have previously clashed. These are just a few troubling examples that have gone uncriticized.
Governor’s accountability:
- Important constitutional requirements, such as the Governor’s special address, are carried out with the support and advice of the Council of Ministers, which is chaired by the Chief Minister.
- A senior statesman who provides gravitas to this high position, the Governor’s constitutional duty is to support, defend, and preserve the Constitution and the law. He is also required to do so by his oath.
- Residents of Raj Bhavan should be above party politics and refrain from interfering with the work of a state administration that has been duly elected. Our Constitution’s strength is demonstrated by the fact that it has persisted for more than 70 years and continues to serve as the steel framework of India’s republican democracy.
- This structure could, however, be undermined and destroyed by hasty constitutional amendments and blatant constitutional infractions. The hazard is considerably greater because no one can predict when the tipping point will come.
Conclusion:
- Parliament should examine the function of governors and suggest necessary revisions to guarantee that state assemblies function effectively and that strong federal linkages are maintained. The Governor’s office has undergone various changes as a result of the Sarkaria and Punchhi commissions. These could be used and examined.
