The cabinet secretary's now-no-longer confidential order clarifying that the Vajpayee government enjoys ``full powers'' since the Constitution has no provision for a caretaker status has already invited and will continue to invite a volley of protest from opposition parties. This is unfortunate. But then, it is the definitive law of election-mode India: any action by one set of politicians invites an equal but opposite reaction from its political opponents. The BJP-led alliance seeks general elections in June to give the people an elected government at the earliest; the opposition clamours for postponement of polls to September to give the Election Commission time to revise electoral rolls and deliver truly representative democracy. The government shrugs off its caretaker status and argues that it is empowered to undertake any decision in the national interest; the opposition cries foul and says a regime unaccountable to Parliament should limit itself to routine administrative matters.Political posturingis all very well -- after all, aggression and offensive strategies make for upbeat poll campaigns. But with the rest of the world hurtling past and the country desperate for feel-good signals to counter the overwhelming economic and political uncertainty, there really can be no case for the business of the nation being kept in limbo -- especially now that this interregnum will span across into autumn. Losses on the stock market since Jayalalitha effected her political earthquake are revised every other day, other losses may be somewhat more difficult to quantify. There is, besides, nowhere in the Constitution any distinction between a government enjoying majority support in the Lok Sabha and one merely discharging its duties in the run-up to elections. Indeed, it would be incumbent upon the Vajpayee government to deal with pressing issues relating to infrastructure, foreign affairs, national security, law and order, and the like. The clarification by the cabinet secretary in this regard makes for soundadministrative procedure.
Received consensus has so far had it that a government which has lost the support of the legislature should eschew policy decisions and acts which could limit the choices available to its successor. But who is to say what constitutes an appropriate response to a changed situation or a policy diversion to reach out to the electorate? Are international treaty obligations on? What about the Independence Day speech by the prime minister? Ultimately, the bottomline is transparency. The government must carry on with the tasks at hand, while being scrupulously upfront about the specifics of a case. The opposition must remain vigilant, while deliberately abjuring the temptation to label routine business as politically motivated. Election time by its very nature does not make for political consensus and maturity. But as the nation goes to the polls for the third time in just about as many years, caretakerhood is a grey area which needs to be urgently redefined. Six-month-long periods ofinertia every so often is a luxury India can ill afford.
Copyright © 1999 Indian Express Newspapers (Bombay) Ltd.