An emergency meeting of the Cabinet was convened here in the morning to
discuss the situation. Prime Minister Narendra Modi was in the chair.
It was decided to recommend to the President to issue a proclamation under Article 356(1) of the Constitution
Taking cognisance of the situation in the State, based on Governor Jyoti
Prashad Rajkhowa’s report, the government felt the State is “heading
for a constitutional crisis” and it warranted the Centre’s intervention
The Centre based its decision on Article 174 of the Constitution,
according to which six months shall not intervene between the last
sitting of the Assembly in one session and the date appointed for its
first sitting in the next session. According to one interpretation, the
next session should therefore have taken place at the latest by January
21, 2016.
The other interpretation is that a session was indeed held on December
16 albeit outside the Assembly building (where a majority of the members
had voted) as access to the building was denied. Notably, the session
which took place on December 16, 2015 has been disputed by Chief
Minister Nabam Tuki and his supporters. Whether this session is valid or
not is under litigation in the Supreme Court.
Even if the Supreme Court rules in favour of the interpretation that this session was not valid, there will be a constitutional breakdown because the requirement of Article 174(1) would have been breached. On the other hand, if the court holds that the December 16 session was valid, it is clear the government is in a minority and is not allowing a vote of confidence. Therefore, in either case, the State is heading for a constitutional crisis
Arunachal Pradesh Political Crisis
- The turmoil began in Arunachal Pradesh on December 16 after 21 rebel Congress lawmakers joined hands with 11 BJP and two independent members to "impeach" Speaker Nabam Rebia at a makeshift venue.
- The Congress alleges that Governor JP Rajkhowa acted as a "BJP agent" and helped its rebel lawmakers by calling an assembly session a month ahead of time.
- Chief Minister Nabam Tuki and the 26 lawmakers on his side in the 60-member assembly boycotted the session calling it illegal and unconstitutional.
- A day later, the rebels and opposition lawmakers gathered at a hotel to "vote out" the Chief Minister and elect his replacement. A no-confidence motion moved by BJP and independent lawmakers was adopted in proceedings chaired by Deputy Speaker T Norbu Thongdok, who is also a rebel.
- The Gauhati High Court first put on hold the decisions taken at the rebel "session". After the High Court dismissed the Speaker's petition, he moved the Supreme Court, which has referred the case to a Constitution bench
Congress moves SCI on recommendation for President's rule in Arunachal Pradesh
The Congress party on Sunday January 24,2016 approached the Supreme Court challenging
Union Cabinet's recommendation for imposing President's Rule in
Arunachal Pradesh.On December 16, 2015, 21 rebel Congress MLAs
joined hands with 11 of BJP and two independents to 'impeach' Assembly
Speaker Nabam Rebia at a makeshift venue, in a move branded as "illegal
and unconstitutional" by the Speaker
"We moved a petition before the SC registry. The petition has been
filed by the state Congress Chief whip Bamang Felix against the Union
Cabinet's decision on imposing President's rule in the state. We have
requested the apex court for urgent hearing," Congress leader and senior
advocate Vivek Tankha said.The Congress party is now waiting Deputy Registrar's next course of action because he will place the petition before the Chief Justice of India.
The recommendation drew stinging condemnation from the opposition with Congress alleging democracy was being trampled and that Modi was "fountainhead" of political intolerance while a shocked Chief Minister Nabam Tuki said such a decision in a sensitive border state was unprecedented and unacceptable
No comments:
Post a Comment