Sign In / Register
Make This My Home Page | Feedback |RSS
You are here: IE »   Story

Federalism has lost two of its biggest votaries

  • Print
  • Mail This Article
  • Comments
  • Add to favorites
  • With the death of Justice R S Sarkaria and S R Bommai, India has lost two strong and well-known votaries of federalism. The emergence of strong regional political parties and greater say for states in national affairs can be attributed to them as they helped define the true nature of relations between the Union and states under the Constitution.

    While Justice Sarkaria clearly laid down the extent of the Union’s powers in context of states, Bommai’s fight for enforcement of these led to well-defined guidelines by the Supreme Court, putting a strong check on the Centre’s arbitrary exercise of powers.

    The scheme of the Indian Constitution before the recommendations of the Sarkaria Commission —- set up in 1983 to examine Centre-state relations —- remained unitary both in nature and spirit, paying only lip service to federal character. The Union Government had an upper hand over states, which remained at the mercy of the Centre in matters of financial, executive or legislative powers, with the threat of President’s Rule under Article 356 hanging like a Damocle’s sword on their existence.

    Ads by Google

    Justice Sarkaria held this to be a mockery of the true spirit of the Constitution and recommended that powers under Article 356 have been given to the Centre for a well-defined purpose and should be used as a last measure, when all available alternatives have failed to prevent a breakdown of the Constitutional machinery in a state.

    “The Constitution framers conceived these provisions as more than a mere grant of overriding powers to the Union over the states. They regarded them as a bulwark of the Constitution, an ultimate assurance of maintaining or restoring representative governments in states, responsible to the people. They expected that these extraordinary provisions would be called into operation rarely, in extreme cases, as a last resort when all alternative correctives fail. Despite the hopes and expectations so emphatically expressed by the framers, in the last 37 years, Article 356 has been brought into action no less than 75 times,” Justice Sarkaria observed in his report.

    ... contd.

    Next12
    Comments
    Post comment

    Be the first to comment.

    Post a Comment
    Name:
    Email:
    Title:
    Maximum characters allowed     
    Comment:
    TERMS OF USE:
    The views, opinions and comments posted are your, and are not endorsed by this website. You shall be solely responsible for the comment posted here. The website reserves the right to delete, reject, or otherwise remove any views, opinions and comments posted or part thereof. You shall ensure that the comment is not inflammatory, abusive, derogatory, defamatory &/or obscene, or contain pornographic matter and/or does not constitute hate mail, or violate privacy of any person (s) or breach confidentiality or otherwise is illegal, immoral or contrary to public policy. Nor should it contain anything infringing copyright &/or intellectual property rights of any person(s).
    I agree to the terms of use.