The noble…

To preserve, protect and defend the Constitution. The Presidential Oath makes it incumbent on the person holding such an office to perform ...

int(1)

To preserve, protect and defend the Constitution. The Presidential Oath makes it incumbent on the person holding such an office to perform all three functions. On Wednesday, President Kocheril Raman Narayanan demonstrated that he could, should the need arise, become a one-person praetorian guard for the sovereign republic of India. By advising the Prime Minister and his Council of Ministers against the ill-conceived proposal to impose Central rule in Uttar Pradesh on Wednesday, he prevented not just the gross Constitutional impropriety implicit in the immediate action but a serious undermining of the democratic credentials of the State. Without democracy the State, as it has been envisaged by the country’s founding fathers, may as well not exist. To perform the funeral rites of democracy in a year marking its 50th anniversary of its freedom would have been a tragic irony of no mean proportions. It needed rare courage to do this. The nation has not forgotten or forgiven the then President, Fakhruddin Ali Ahmed, for willingly reducing himself into a rubber stamp after Indira Gandhi promulgated the Emergency in 1975, an image doubly reinforced by a searing political cartoon of the day showing the President signing on the dotted line while still seated in his bathtub.

Servility does not a President make. Indeed, if the President’s role is crucial, it is also an extremely sensitive one, an indispensable part of an intricate system of checks and balances. He does not govern himself, but he facilitates governance. Or, as B.R. Ambedkar put it in a Constituent Assembly debate, “He represents the nation, but does not rule the nation.” Representing the nation implies that the President is duty-bound to ensure that the Prime Minister and his council of ministers are doing right by the people. The Constitution provides broad guidelines on how this can be ensured but a great deal depends on actual Presidential practice. There are not a few grey areas here. Article 74, which was interpreted in differing ways by legal luminaries in the wake of Wednesday’s events, states that the President may require that advice tendered by the Council of Ministers be reconsidered, but is ultimately bound to act in accordance with the advice given after such reconsideration. This upholds the important principle of the supremacy of Parliament within a democracy. Yet, what would have happened if the Union cabinet had refused to budge from its earlier position of wanting the UP assembly dissolved? The question needs to be clarified through public debate because it touches upon some very fundamental aspects of Presidential power.

Finally, there is that all-important aspect of wisdom. It is not just courage that makes a President, but abundant wisdom as well. After all, the President is not in competition with the Prime Minister and his colleagues but has to build a relationship of mutual trust with them. It is only in this fashion that the various organs of governance can work together as a harmonious entity. Given the intractable nature of Indian politics and the shaky Gujral-led coalition at the Centre, it would need all President Narayanan’s considerable courage and wisdom to guide the country in the days ahead.