Meghalaya governor Tathagata Roy’s controversial tweet about boycotting Kashmiris after the horrific Pulwama attack and the sharp reaction it evoked has once again reignited the debate over the utility of having this gubernatorial posts at the first place.
“Time has come to jettison these expensive excellencies,” news portal The Print said in an article on Monday. Far too many times, “these agents” (read governors) of the Centre have misused the discretion granted to them under Article 163 of the Constitution to further the interests of the party ruling at the Centre, it said.
Accusing the Centre of filling up of these posts in various states with their own men/women, the article said the Centre has conveniently ignored the wishes of the constituent assembly which drafted the constitution and successive panel reports to consult the state government before finalising the names.
“In fact, the first Administrative Reforms Commission (ARC) also highlighted this recommendation, saying that while the appointment should remain the discretion of the Centre, the convention of consulting the chief minister should be strengthened. This suggestion too remains only on paper”, the editorial said.
Even though several commissions have recommended that non-partisan, apolitical men and women of integrity only should be appointed governors, the fact remains that most governments at the Centre have filled the posts with their own people. These are people who, when the time comes, can be expected to do whatever is required to be done without bothering about legal and constitutional morality.
The Justice R.S. Sarkaria Committee on Centre-State Relations recommended in 1988 that only persons of some eminence and who “have not taken too great a part in politics generally and particularly in the recent past” should be appointed governors. But “take a look at the list of existing governors and you will find leaders of the political party or group in power at the Centre residing in the various Raj Bhawans,” the editorial said.
