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

News Snippets

  • Sikh extremists attacked a cinema hall in London that was playing Kangana Ranaut's controversial film 'Emergency'
  • A Delhi court directed the investigating agencies to senstize officers to collect nail clippings, fingernail scrappings or finger swab in order to get DNA profile as direct evidence of sexual attack is often not present and might result in an offender going scot free
  • Uniform Civil Code rules cleared by state cabinet, likely to be implemented in the next 10 days
  • Supreme Court reiterates that there is no point in arresting the accused after the chargesheet has been filed and the investigation is complete
  • Kolkata court sentences Sanjoy Roy, the sole accused in the R G Kar rape-murder case, to life term. West Bengal government and CBI to appeal in HC for the death penalty
  • Supreme Court stays criminal defamation case against Rahul Gandhi for his remarks against home minister Amit Shah in Jharkhand during the AICC plenary session
  • Government reviews import basket to align it with the policies of the Trump administration
  • NCLT orders liquidation of GoAir airlines
  • Archery - Indian archers bagged 2 silver in Nimes Archery tournament in France
  • Stocks make impressive gain on Monday - Sensex adds 454 points to 77073 and Nifty 141 points to 23344
  • D Gukesh draws with Fabiano Caruana in the Tata Steel chess tournament in the Netherlands
  • Women's U-19 T20 WC - In a stunning game, debutants Nigeria beat New Zealand by 2 runs
  • Rohit Sharma to play under Ajinkye Rahane in Mumbai's Ranji match against J&K
  • Virat Kohli to play in Delhi's last group Ranji trophy match against Saurashtra. This will be his first Ranji match in 12 years
  • The toll in the Rajouri mystery illness case rose to 17 even as the Centre sent a team to study the situation
Calling the case not 'rarest of rare', a court in Kolkata sentenced Sanjay Roy, the only accused in the R G Kar rape-murder case to life in prison until death
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.