Anil Anand
Two recent developments that generated more controversies than having the desired impact on governance have raised a vital question; should formation of various cabinet committees, both at Centre and in the states, be used for political purposes or squarely for achieving good governance for which these were perceived?
This significant question arose when Prime Minister Narendra Modi recently formed eight cabinet committees including two new concepts but kept the official number two as per protocol, Defence Minister Rajnath from some crucial committees. At the same time Modi’s close confidant Home Minister Amit Shah found himself to be part all the panels virtually catapulting him to the de facto number two position.
As a controversy erupted the Government attempted to undo some damage through a late amendment to give some respect to Singh’s number two status in the cabinet. Earlier, he was only a part of the committees on security and economic affairs but subsequently he was drafted into committees on political affairs, parliamentary Affairs, investment and growth and employment and skill development. But he was kept out of one of the important cabinet panels, the Cabinet Committee on Appointments (CCA) which deals all high level appointments in various quarters of the government.
This panel makes appointments to posts of the three services chiefs, Director General of Military Operations, chiefs of all Air and Army Commands, Director General of Defence Intelligence Agency, Scientific Advisor to the Defence Minister, Director General of Armed Forces Medical Services, Director General of Ordnance Factories, Director General of Defence Estates, Controller General of Defence Accounts, Director of Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses, Solicitor-General, Governor of Reserve Bank of India, Chairman and Members of the Railway Board, Chief Vigilance Officers in Public Sector Undertakings and Secretariat posts of and above the rank of Joint Secretaries in the Government of India. The Committee also decides on all important empanelments and shift of officers serving on Central deputation.
How can someone number two in the Union cabinet be kept out of this all important Committee? If so it is but natural that the move would be seen as guided by a political motive.
Close on the heels a similar development took place in Congress ruled Punjab where chief minister Captain Amrinder Singh is engaged in a running battle of one-upmanship with his cabinet colleague and high profile cricketer turned entertainer and politician Navjot Singh Sidhu. The Captain went a step further and kept Sidhu out of the ambit of these committees.
Were these moves by Modi and Amrinder meant to settle political scores with those within their own respective political parties whom they looked upon as a threat or challenging their authority?
Notwithstanding the fact that through knee jerk reaction to amend the order and partially restore Rajnath Singh’s status effort was made to cap the controversy. However, keeping him out of the CCA gave further credence to rumours that the committees’ formation had strong political elements attached to it.
There is no doubt that by including Shah in all the eight cabinet sub-committees, Prime Minister Modi has clearly indicated that he would prefer his long time colleague from Gujarat over Rajnath Singh in matters of governance. This is his prerogative also. Given the fact that Modi is a stickler for rules, the best thing he could have done was to declare Shah as number two in the cabinet.
Why announce Singh as the number two and then cause him embarrassment by keeping him out of key cabinet panels? Is not the move loaded with politics? The answer is yes.
Shah will head significant committees on parliamentary affairs and accommodation, and is one of the two members of the most important panel on appointments. This virtually accords him the number two status.
It is amazing that two powerful leaders Modi and Amrinder who have singlehandedly ensured their political parties electoral victories at national and Punjab levels respectively, and are undisputed leaders in their own right, resorted to politically manipulate the cabinet committee system to either show their authority or settle political scores with their own partymen.
In the overall interest of governance and in the interest of settled principles and conventions attached to the cabinet system, these situations could have been avoided. The approach looked rather overzealous both in the cases of Rajnath Singh and Sidhu. On the contrary both Modi and Amrinder by doing so have impliedly recognised their perceived rivals’ stature. True to their unassailable stature the PM and Punjab CM could have tackled the issue with some finesse rather than been seen as fighting some protracted political battle with the rivals.
In a bubbling democracy such as India there is no doubt that the governance would always be under the influence of politics particularly that of the ruling party’s variety. Still it is imperative and must be ensured that the system of governance at the cabinet levels at least is insulated from politics. It is easier to say and difficult to be done but it should be done.
Why the cabinet committees and their purpose?
Under the constitutional scheme of things the executive works under the Government of India Transaction of Business Rules, 1961. These Rules flow out of Article 77(3) of the Constitution, which states: “The President shall make rules for the more convenient transaction of the business of the Government of India, and for the allocation among Ministers of the said business.” The Rules mandate the minister-in-charge of a ministry to dispose of “all business allotted to a department under him or her”.
However, when the “subject of a case concerns more than one departments, no decision is taken “until all such departments have concurred, or, failing such concurrence, a decision thereon has been taken by or under the authority of the Cabinet”.
In order to tackle such situations the Prime Minister constitutes Standing Committees of the Cabinet and sets out the specific functions assigned to them. He or she (PM) can add or reduce the number of committees.
And matter that concerns more than one Ministry or department is brought before such committees to thrash out the issue without any delay. In fact, it is a one-window system kind of arrangement.
The Prime Minister and state chief ministers are entitled to retain and wield their authority but they are equally responsible to protect the dignity of the Cabinet system.
feedbackexcelsior@gmail.com
Trending Now
E-Paper
Follow our WhatsApp channel