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

News Snippets

  • Uttarakhand HC says marital discord, suspicion and quarrels cannot be held to be abetment of suicide
  • Two sisters, both brides-to-be, died by suspected suicide in Jodhpur. No suicide note was found
  • RTI reveals that 200 big cats were poached in India between 2005 and 2025, with the most in MP
  • After the US Supreme Court order on tariffs, Centre has put Indian trade team's US visit on hold
  • Delhi Police bust terror module linked to Lashkar that was plotting to strike in Delhi. Arrest 7 Bangladeshis with Aadhar IDs
  • PM Modi announced in his Mann Ki Baat that Edwin Lutyens' statue will be replaced with that of C Rajagopalchari at the Rashtrapati Bhawan
  • Facial recognition at Digi Yatra gates in Kolkata Airport suffered prolonged glitch on Sunday, forcing passengers to wait in long queues
  • Ranji Final: Strong Karnataka take on rising J&K in the match starting from Tuesday
  • Rising Stars women's cricket: India 'A' beat Bangladesh by 46 runs to capture title
  • Super 8s: Co-hosts Sri Lanka lose too, England beat them by 51 runs
  • Super 8s: South Africa crush India by 76 runs as nothing goes right for the hosts
  • PM Modi inaugurates India's fastest metro in Meerut and the first Vande Bharat sleeper in Bengal, This sleeper will cover Howrah to Guwahati route
  • After his consecutive failures, Abhishek Sharma has created a problem for the team management: should they give him one more chance in a vital match today or go for Sanju Samson as opener
  • A Pocso court in Prayagraj ordered an FIR against Swami Avi Mukteshawaranand and his disciple Muktanand Giri for molesting underage boys in their Magh Mela camp
  • TOI reported that while private universities filed more patents, elite institutions like IIT and IISc got more approvals between 2020-2025
T20 World Cup Super 8s: India get a reality check, outplayed by South Africa in their first match, end 12-match winning streak
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.