Governor

Governor

Context

In recent years, the role of the Governor has come under intense judicial and public scrutiny, particularly in states like Kerala and Tamil Nadu. Controversies have erupted regarding the Governor’s Address to the Legislative Assembly, where prepared texts were either altered or skipped, and instances where Governors threatened to bypass constitutional mandates altogether.

About the News

• Procedural Deviations: Friction has arisen when Governors deviate from the speech prepared by the state cabinet, leading to constitutional standoffs.
• Legislative Deadlock: Continuous friction over the withholding of assent to bills has prompted state governments to seek intervention from the Supreme Court.
• Federal Tension: These incidents highlight the evolving power struggle between appointed heads of state and elected governments, particularly in states ruled by opposition parties.

Constitutional Framework of the Office

• Mandatory Address:
  • Article 176: The Governor must address the Legislative Assembly at the commencement of the first session of each year and after every general election.
  • Article 87: Provides a parallel requirement for the President regarding the Parliament.
• Nature of the Address: The speech is a statement of policy and program of the State Government. As a constitutional head, the Governor is expected to read the text prepared by the elected executive.
• Legislative Powers:
  • Article 200: Details the Governor's power to grant assent, withhold assent, or reserve a bill for the President’s consideration.
  • The "As Soon As Possible" Clause: The Constitution does not provide a specific deadline for action on bills, leading to significant delays.

Core Issues and Federalism

• Agent of the Centre: Critics argue that Governors often function as representatives of the Central Government rather than impartial constitutional heads, disrupting state governance.
• Pocket Veto Concerns: By withholding assent for indefinite periods (sometimes exceeding two years), Governors can effectively paralyze state legislative intent.
• Appointment & Tenure:
  • Article 155 & 156: Governors are appointed by the President and serve at the "pleasure of the President."
  • Lack of Security: Unlike the President, Governors have no fixed tenure and no formal impeachment process, making them vulnerable to political shifts at the Centre.

Judicial Observations

• Timeline for Bills: The Supreme Court has clarified that Governors cannot "sit on bills" indefinitely. Recent observations suggest that decisions should ideally be made within a three-month period.
• Discretionary Limits: The Court has emphasized that the "discretion" of the Governor is not absolute and must be exercised in a manner that subserve the democratic process, not thwart it.
• Active Duty: Pending bills do not receive "deemed assent"; the Governor is constitutionally obligated to take a definitive action (Assent, Return, or Reserve).

Committee Recommendations for Reform

Several commissions have suggested reforms to safeguard the neutrality of the office:

Way Forward

• Constitutional Morality: Governors must adhere to the convention of acting on the "aid and advice" of the Council of Ministers to maintain federal harmony.
• Legislative Clarity: There is a pressing need to define the phrase "as soon as possible" in Article 200 to prevent the indefinite stalling of bills.
• Neutrality: Implementing the Punchhi Commission's recommendation for a bipartisan selection committee could reduce the perception of the Governor as a political tool.

Conclusion

The Office of the Governor is intended to be a bridge between the Centre and the States. To preserve the federal structure, the office must transition from a center-aligned supervisor to a genuine constitutional guardian, ensuring that the wheels of state legislation turn without arbitrary hindrance.