Enough is enough. I am distressed over crimes against women; this incident leaves me disheartened and frightened - Draupadi Murmu, President of India.
Protests are erupting in Kolkata over the rape and murder of a woman doctor. The President has issued a statement about women's safety.
There is no democracy in Bengal. The government of Mamata Banerjee has failed to live up to the expectations of the people. She has not fulfilled her responsibilities. I am worried about the people of Bengal. This government is protecting criminals. It has completely failed to provide security to its people. No one is safe in Bengal. The police should be safeguarding the people, but they have failed to do so. Criminals have the full protection of the police. The Police Commissioner should be immediately removed. Mamata should resign from her position. - Governor CV Ananda Bose of Bengal.
Later, Bengal's Governor CV Ananda Bose met with President Draupadi Murmu, Vice President Jagdeep Dhankhar, and Home Minister Amit Shah in Delhi.
Following these statements, Bengal's CM Mamata Banerjee responded...
‘If Bengal is set on fire, Assam, the Northeast, Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, Jharkhand, Odisha, and Delhi will also be affected. Modi Babu is using his party to ignite fires here. We will topple your throne.'
Mamata's statement caused a huge uproar. BJP chief ministers unleashed a barrage of statements against her. Assam CM Himanta Biswa Sarma said - Sister, how dare you threaten Assam? Do not show us your red eyes. Do not try to burn India with the politics of your failure. You should not speak in a divisive manner.
Senior BJP leader and former Jharkhand CM Babulal Marandi said, ‘Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee is threatening to spread chaos in states including Jharkhand which is extremely condemnable and unfortunate. The intelligence agencies had predicted this, and Mamata Banerjee is speaking in exactly that kind of separatist language. Recommend President's rule.'
The harshness of these statements sparked a debate - can President's rule be imposed in West Bengal? Is it so easy for the Modi government to impose President's rule? If something like President's rule becomes a reality, will it benefit Mamata? Will the BJP benefit or suffer? Let's unravel this case thread by thread. First, let's understand the circumstances under which President's rule can be imposed in any state.
You might also like: Apologies in politics: Why are they so difficult?
Chaos, unrest, administrative inefficiency - conditions for President's rule
The Constitution outlines the circumstances for President's rule in Articles 355 and 356. Article 355 empowers the central government to protect states from external aggression and internal unrest. Article 356 allows the imposition of President's rule if the state government fails to function according to constitutional provisions. This requires a recommendation from the state governor. In many cases, if the central government itself believes that the state's constitutional machinery has failed, it can recommend President's rule on its own.
Initially, President's rule can be imposed in a state for a maximum of 6 months. Approval from both houses of Parliament is required for the recommendation of President's rule. Even if the Lok Sabha is not in session, it can be passed by the Rajya Sabha and later ratified by the Lok Sabha within a month of formation. The maximum period for President's rule is three years.
You might also like: Nehru legacy: Why is unilateral entry controversial?
9 instances in Modi government compared to 90 under Congress rule...
So far, the Modi government has recommended President's rule 9 times. It has been implemented in states like Jammu and Kashmir, Uttarakhand, Maharashtra, and Arunachal Pradesh. During the Congress regime, President's rule was imposed over 90 times by ousting elected governments. Talking about former PM Indira Gandhi, she used this provision more than 50 times.
Understanding the nuances of President's rule, let's delve into the main issue.
Mamata or Modi? Who benefits from President's rule in Bengal?
To act or not to act... what's the dilemma?
Given
Bengal
's current situation, Shakespeare's famous line fits perfectly. With all due respect to the Bard, a modified version better describes the situation - To be or not to be Bengal is the question! However, Bengal might not remain a question for long. The emerging circumstances suggest that the answer could soon be found, likely maintaining the status quo.
