oppn parties Crisis in Arunachal as Resolution Passed for Speaker's Removal

News Snippets

  • The home ministry has notified 50% constable-level jobs in BSF for direct recruitment for ex-Agniveers
  • Supreme Court said that if an accused or even a convict obtains a NOC from the concerned court with the rider that permission would be needed to go abroad, the government cannot obstruct renewal of their passport
  • Supreme Court said that criminal record and gravity of offence play a big part in bail decisions while quashing the bail of 5 habitual offenders
  • PM Modi visits Bengal, fails to holds a rally in Matua heartland of Nadia after dense fog prevents landing of his helicopter but addresses the crowd virtually from Kolkata aiprort
  • Government firm on sim-linking for web access to messaging apps, but may increase the auto logout time from 6 hours to 12-18 hours
  • Mizoram-New Delhi Rajdhani Express hits an elephant herd in Assam, killing seven elephants including four calves
  • Indian women take on Sri Lanka is the first match of the T20 series at Visakhapatnam today
  • U19 Asia Cup: India take on Pakistan today for the crown
  • In a surprisng move, the selectors dropped Shubman Gill from the T20 World Cup squad and made Axar Patel the vice-captain. Jitesh Sharma was also dropped to make way for Ishan Kishan as he was performing well and Rinku Singh earned a spot for his finishing abilities
  • Opposition parties, chiefly the Congress and TMC, say that changing the name of the rural employment guarantee scheme is an insult to the memory of Mahatma Gandhi
  • Commerce secreatary Rajesh Agarwal said that the latest data shows that exporters are diversifying
  • Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman said that if India were a 'dead economy' as claimed by opposition parties, India's rating would not have been upgraded
  • The Insurance Bill, to be tabled in Parliament, will give more teeth to the regulator and allow 100% FDI
  • Nitin Nabin took charge as the national working president of the BJP
  • Division in opposition ranks as J&K chief minister Omar Abdullah distances the INDIA bloc from vote chori and SIR pitch of the Congress
U19 World Cup - Pakistan thrash India by 192 runs ////// Shubman Gill dropped from T20 World Cup squad, Axar Patel replaces him as vice-captain
oppn parties
Crisis in Arunachal as Resolution Passed for Speaker's Removal

By admin
First publised on 2015-12-17 17:53:41

About the Author

Sunil Garodia By our team of in-house writers.
A constitutional crisis has emerged in Arunachal Pradesh. 33 MLAs, including 20 Congress dissidents, out of the House strength of 60, passed a resolution for the removal of the State Legislative Assembly Speaker Nabam Rebia. Before this, an impeachment notice was given against the Speaker on November 19th. Subsequently, the Speaker had disqualified 14 Congress MLAs. The Governor had stepped in to direct the Deputy Speaker, Tenzing Norbu Thonduk, to conduct the day’s proceedings. The Congress chief minister Nabam Tuki and the rest of 26 MLAs had not attended the session. Tuki later called the action a mockery of democracy. The AICC has deplored the governor’s action.

Two things emerge from this. Was the Speaker, against whom an impeachment motion was pending, competent enough to disqualify the 14 dissident Congress MLAs? Further, was the Governor constitutionally correct in asking the Deputy Speaker to conduct the session where the Speaker was ‘removed?’

Charges and counter charges are flying. While the Congress and the chief minister have called the assembly session illegal and questioned the constitutional validity of 14 disqualified MLAs voting for the Speaker’s removal, the BJP on the other hand has questioned the constitutional validity of the Speaker disqualifying MLAs even though an impeachment motion was pending against him. The Speaker, Nabam Rebia said that he was competent to disqualify the MLAs as the motion was not moved.

Obviously, the Governor thought otherwise. In the fitness of things, if an impeachment motion notice is given against a Speaker, he should not take such important decisions as disqualifying MLAs till the motion is moved and defeated. For, in disqualifying them, he is seen to have removed 14 such persons who would have voted in favour of the motion. Is this correct? While constitutional pundits will debate over this issue, no one can sit on judgment in his own case and neither can anyone remove persons who are likely to vote against him after an impeachment notice has been served.

As for the Governor’s role, what was he to do if he found that the some ruling party MLA’s were not supporting their own party and there was no urgency on the part of the ruling dispensation to move impeachment motion? A notice for an impeachment motion is a serious matter and it cannot be left pending for nearly a month. The Congress should first set its own house in order before pointing fingers at others.