It is indeed surprising that Prime Minister Narasimha Rao has walked into the trap laid by some of his partymen by dismissing the BJP governments after having given the impression that he was recovering his composure and capacity for cool calculation.
Mr Arjun Singh, determined to capture the ideological leadership of the ruling party and embarrass Mr Rao, has been in the forefront of the demand for the dismissal of the BJP governments. If he had not masterminded the outcry at the CWC, he had played a significant role.
Mr Singh had opened the anti-BJP and, by implication, an anti-Rao, front long before the Ayodhya dispute assumed serious proportions. Only, his demand was then limited to Madhya Pradesh. The Prime Minister was quick to recognise the implications. On the eve of the plenary session of the All Indian Congress Committee in Tirupati, he took advantage of meeting in Madhya Pradesh to say that state governments should be allowed to complete their term.
Mr Rao had all the reasons in the world to be wary of the trap that was being laid for him as his position now had become much weaker than it was when he spoke at Tirupati, not because he took the UP government’s assurance to protect the disputed structure at its face value, but because he panicked after its demolition, as Pandit Nehru did in relation to the Chinese attack in 1962, and like him exaggerated out of all proportion the magnitude of the problem.
After having allowed himself to be pushed into banning the RSS for which there was no warrant in the absence of evidence that its leadership had been involved in the demolition of the Babri structure, Mr Rao had begun to show that he was recovering his cool and composure and was getting ready to take on his tormentors.
It is not clear on whose behalf AICC spokesman VN Gadgil made the statement suggesting that the Congress was about to approach the Election Commission for derecongition of the BJP. But it is notable that Mr Sharad Pawar was quick to contradict him and to put it on record that the government did not propose to make any such move. Incidentally, the Commission has already dismissed such an application by none other than Mr Arjun Singh.
Mr Arjun Singh has ‘allies’ in the Janata Dal and the Left Front. The Left Front has not only turned down Mr Rao’s suggestion of a common campaign against ‘communal forces’, a euphemism for the BJP and the RSS, but overcome its earlier opposition against the use of Article 356 of the Constitution to dismiss state governments and invoked it in relation to the BJP governments in Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan and Himachal Pradesh.
The alliance is, however, one of convenience. The Janata Dal and Left Front leaders could well be calculating that it is in their long-term interest to keep the pressure on Mr Rao and encourage his critics within the Congress so that he is not able to reconsolidate his leadership. In the process they have strengthened Mr Arjun Singh’s position.
Clearly the demand for the dismissal of the BJP governments from within the Congress and outside of it was part of a strategy to keep Mr Rao off balance. He is too experienced and sufficiently shrewd a leader and should have recognised this fact. He had also less reason feel as vulnerable as he did on December 6 and during the riots.
All that apart, however, there was no case for the dismissal of the BJP governments. There had been no breakdown of the Constitutional arrangements in the three States. They had not said that they would not implement the ban on the RSS and other organisations. The argument advanced by Mr. Arjun Singh that they could not be depended on to do so in view of the association of ministers with the RSS can have no validity in law. Governments represent the people not parties. If Congress leaders have not recognised this distinction, it does not follow that others do not. By Mr. Arjun Singh’s logic no non-BJP party, including the Congress, can be allowed to stay in office because none of them is likely to implement the ban on the Jamait-e-Islami Hind. Indeed what about the Centre itself? Is it serious about the ban on the Jamait?
The decision to dismiss BJP governments is not only partisan but violative of the Constitution. Anyway, the Congress leadership has never been known to be particularly solicitous about the Constitution and the higher judiciary not particularly effective in enforcing it. Remember Supreme Court upheld the arbitrary exercise of power during the emergency even in terms of the emergency.
It may be noted that the Union government has ordered a CBI inquiry into the demolition of the Babri structure. It does not necessarily follow that it is totally in the dark about who did what and how. But it does follow, to put it no higher, that there are gaps in the ‘information’ in its possession which, in its view, need to be filled. Thus it is possible that the CBI inquiry may produce results which do not endorse, or endorse only partly, the assumptions on which the government has acted.
The Observer of Business and Politics, 16 December 1992