oppn parties Sikkim: Tamang Saved By A Controversial Ruling From The Watchdog

News Snippets

  • India reaches 700000 corona cases and 20000 deaths due to the disease
  • West Bengal plans to create a plasma bank for Covid patients
  • Chargesheet filed against arrested J&K police officer Devinder Singh and others. Singh accused of being a Pakistani informer
  • Very few people visit ASI monuments that were opened on Monday
  • Sensex gains 1500 points in four trading sessions in July
  • The Centre says final year university exams should be held in September and degrees should only be given on the basis of exams
  • Trade surplus for India in June for the first time in 18 years
  • Highway ministry increases the border roads upkeep fund by four times
  • Some scientists claim coronavirus is airborne and ask WHO to revise recommendations
  • PM Modi holds a meeting with President Kovind amid the border dispute between India and China
  • The Taj Mahal will remain closed even as other ASI monuments will reopen from today
  • 36 Vande Bharat flights to be operated between India and the US by Air India
  • Bungalow occupied by Priyanka Gandhi allotted to BJP MP Anil Baluni, the head of the party's media cell
  • Kerala extends coronavirus guidelines for one year
  • Ban on international flights extended till July 31
After four months of standoff, including a bloody clash, India and China agree on pulling back troops at the LAC
oppn parties
Sikkim: Tamang Saved By A Controversial Ruling From The Watchdog

By Sunil Garodia

About the Author

Sunil Garodia Editor-in-Chief of indiacommentary.com. Current Affairs analyst and political commentator. Writes for a number of publications.

Consider the scenario. A by-election is coming up in Sikkim. The unelected chief minister, who was appointed to the position in blatant disregard of the Supreme Court’s order in the Jayalalitha case, has to be elected to the legislature by November 23. Fortunately, the election is to be held on October 21. But there is a problem. The chief minister has been disqualified from contesting elections for 6 years due to his conviction in a corruption case earlier. So does the chief minister leave his position like an ethical man? No. If he was ethical, would he have become the chief minister in the first place?

Then what is the solution? In comes the ‘friendly’ Election Commission (EC). It reduces the period of disqualification from 6 years to just one year and one month, a period that has already elapsed since he was released from jail on August 10, 2018. There is no precedent for such a decision. It remains a mystery how the EC arrived at the figure of one year and one month. Yes, the EC does have discretionary powers in this regard, but the timing of the decision and the fact that it is unprecedented makes it dubious and controversial.

Prem Singh Tamang’s appointment itself was arguably illegal if one goes strictly by the Supreme Court’s judgment in Jayalalitha’s case. The court had then ruled that if “the Governor does appoint as Chief Minister a person who is not qualified to be a member of the legislature or who is disqualified to be such, the appointment is contrary to the provisions of Article 164 of the Constitution, as we have interpreted it, and the authority of the appointee to hold the appointment can be challenged in quo warranto proceedings. That the Governor has made the appointment does not give the appointee any higher right to hold the appointment. If the appointment is contrary to constitutional provisions it will be struck down.” Although the case filed against his appointment has still not been decided, given the similarities with the Jayalalitha case, it will in all probability be decided against him.

But in the meantime, courtesy the EC, Tamang has already filed his nomination and will obviously win the bypoll and become a ‘legal’ chief minister. The pending case would then become infructuous. But what has happened is neither morally correct nor in support of clean politics. That a person who was convicted and jailed for corruption has been shown such leniency sets a dangerous precedent. If the present law states that the ban should be for 6 years, no leniency should have been shown to Tamang just because the law was different when he committed the crime. The law as applicable on the day he was released from jail should have been considered. The EC should not have reduced the period of disqualification. The Centre is fighting corruption by dismissing corrupt government officers. But if the BJP supports such politicians, the fight against corruption will have no meaning. After all, how will corrupt chief ministers clean corrupt bureaucracies?