Back to original paradox in Karnataka
The nearly four-week-old imbroglio in Karnataka may be over in the next few days. Chief Minister H D Kumaraswamy’s trust vote motion may finally be taken up. At the end of it, the state may get itself a government that did not come through the electoral process. The incumbent one too was the child of a post-facto alliance between the Congress and JD(S). Now, the rebellion by 18 MLAs from the ruling coalition who have quit their posts has brought us back to the original paradox.
Still, this unusual no-confidence vote by the rebel group invites questions of political ethics—since it is allegedly at the behest of the opposition BJP—and also opens up a legal conundrum. When the Speaker took his time to accept the resignations, the matter landing at the Supreme Court’s doorstep was an expected corollary.
The SC, by now the default arbiter in Karnataka, has readily walked in and pronounced a verdict that’s ostensibly well-balanced on principle but tilts the scales, perhaps irretrievably, for HDK. It upheld the Speaker’s constitutional right to decide on the resignations in a time-frame he deems fit, but also upheld the “right” of rebel MLAs to not be at the Assembly, or be forced by a party whip to be present, for the trust vote.
Therefore, the future looks rather nebulous for the incumbent regime; the next regime, presuming one comes out of this churning, will be safe from a trust vote for six months. What happens thereafter is anybody’s guess. However, one thing is sure: MLAs can now legally skip Assembly sessions and be holed up in hotels and resorts, without fear of the party whip or the anti-defection law. Never mind if they were elected as party representatives. If they are disqualified, their sons or daughters can always step in to keep their little constituency-kingdoms intact. Indian democracy is certainly evolving.