India This Week

Mamata’s conundrum: Delhi or Kolkata; The Straight and Narrow; Judicial Appointments: Echo from the Past; Amar Singh: Nuisance Value Bargainer

In view of Trinamool Congress leader Mamata Banerjee’s repeated absence from Delhi, the Congress has suggested she nominates someone else from her party to the Railway Ministry, so that she could concentrate on the fast unfolding politics of West Bengal. According to sources, the Trinamool chief has not yet made up her mind on the Congress’ proposal—to choose between Delhi and Kolkata.

Congress’ suggestion to Mamata has come in the wake of her increasing engagement with West Bengal, especially during and after the local bodies’ elections in the state. So busy has Mamata become in the state that she frequently misses Cabinet meetings. She could not even attend a crucial meeting of an Empowered Group of Ministers (EGoM) that was to discuss the important issue of fuel price hikes and its effect on people. Her preoccupation in West Bengal politics is said to be affecting even the functioning of the Railway Ministry.

Sources in the Congress say since the Trinamool chief’s engagement with West Bengal—where Assembly polls are due in April-May next year—is only going to increase, she should swiftly nominate someone else from her party to head the Railway Ministry.

Mamata Banerjee has so far not taken any decision on the Congress’ proposal. Trinamool sources say the party chief still remains apprehensive of nominating someone else from her party for a Cabinet rank because such a nominee may become another power centre, challenging her authority. It was precisely this reason that led Mamata Banerjee to opt for just a single cabinet berth—only for herself—at the time of the formation of the UPA Government in May last year, even though her party, with 19 MPs, could have got more. All other Trinamool ministers, therefore, are either ministers of state or deputy ministers. Insiders say that Mamata may find it difficult to remain silent on the issue for long. The pressure of the Congress is only likely to increase on her as the run-up to Assembly polls begins in West Bengal.

For all the discord among them, Kerala’s political parties are united over one issue. They don’t want the national highways—NH 17 and 46—passing through the state to be widened. With Assembly polls approaching, their positions have hardened. Recently, Chief Minister VS Achuthanandan led an all-party delegation to impress upon the PM that the National Highway Authority of India (NHAI) should not widen the highways to more than 30 metres. The authority wanted to widen the highways to 60 metre width. Currently, the average width of these highways in the state is 20 metres. The widening is being opposed because it would entail individuals losing property in this land-starved state, which also has a huge population. The state also has a higher than national average of road accident fatalities, with around 4,000 succumbing in 35,000 accidents every year. 

Even intellectuals have got into the drama, saying people will not be able to cross the roads once highways are expanded, and some even suggesting that wider highways will end up dividing people. With so much public support behind this move, the political class extracted a promise from the NHAI that the two highways will not be expanded beyond 45 metres. But Kerala’s Marxists and Congress leaders insist on a 30-metre expansion limit.

Sadly, sane voices are in a minority and no one is in a mood to listen to the argument that good roads bring development, and it will help Kerala’s tourism industry.

Law Minister Veerappa Moily says he favours a new method of appointing judges rather than the present system of the collegium—a panel of the country’s top five judges, including the Chief Justice— making these appointments. He has said that the Government is working on a plan. His statement earlier this week came nearly two months after he had announced that the Government is ready with the Judges’ Standard and Accountability Bill, which would effect these changes.

“The Government is thinking of making changes in the appointment procedures, as the present practice does not fully reflect the two Supreme Court judgments that led to the creation of the existing system. India may be among the few countries in the world where judges appoint themselves, a practice that started after 1993, replacing the system of the Government picking judges for the higher Judiciary,” Moily said in an interview.

In October last year, the law Ministry, in its vision statement, had said that the collegium system of appointment of judges to the higher Judiciary came in the way of ending judge shortages. The vision envisages involvement of the Executive and legislature in hunting for the best talent. In 2006, the UPA Government, in its first run, had brought in the Judges (Inquiry) Bill. The Parliamentary Standing Committee that examined the Bill also suggested that the appointment of judges be done by a panel much bigger than the collegium, and should include representatives from the Executive and Judiciary. 

The 2006 Bill sought to set up a National Judicial Council to inquire into complaints against the Judiciary. The standing committee had suggested that higher Judiciary appointments be revisited as well to fast-track judicial reform.

When the Bill was introduced, many legal luminaries, including former chief justices and law ministers, suggested that it was a diluted version of what was required, yet it would ensure that some headway was made in the matter. But the UPA allowed the Bill to lapse and it never became law.

The point is, what the Law Minister has said is not new. The matter has been discussed and debated for years now. It is widely accepted that the system needs change and more transparency. 

The Government now needs to act on effecting the change rather than just repeating what has been said over and over again.

Former Samajwadi Party (SP) leader Amar Singh’s all-out efforts to gain some political weight in Uttar Pradesh has indeed started showing, not as a political force but as a spoiler in the Congress’ bid to win back the state. The byelection in the Doomariaganj Assembly seat, which was won by BSP candidate Khatoon Taufiq, has surprised all, not because Mayawati retained the constituency or that the SP and Congress were left sulking at fourth and fifth places respectively, but because it threw up a non-entity, the Peace Party, as a major vote-grabber. 

Despite being in existence for almost a decade, Dr Ayub Khan’s Peace Party could never create any political wave in any part of the state. Amar Singh’s backing this time round, though, led Peace Party candidate Sachidanand Pandey to get 26,300 votes, thus spoiling the Congress and SP’s chances in Doomariaganj. Having shown his nuisance value, Amar Singh was quick to laud Congress leader Rahul Gandhi’s efforts in Uttar Pradesh. His message to the Congress is clear—take him in or be humiliated again in the crucial 2012 Assembly polls. 

For the Congress, it is a testing time. Giving in to Amar Singh’s wishes in order to neutralise him is bound to sully Rahul Gandhi’s stated position of practising clean politics in UP—a possibility that would only strengthen its rivals.

It is high time the Congress came out openly against special interest-driven political forces like Amar Singh. Any dithering may only prove that the party is pacifying spoilers for the sake of winning power in UP.