'Maharashtra governor did not do anything that was contrary to the Supreme Court's decision.'
The fate of the Uddhav Thackeray government in Maharashtra will be decided on the floor of the state assembly on Thursday, June 30, 2022.
After more than a week of political instability, Maharashtra Governor Bhagat Singh Koshyari on Wednesday, June 29, called for a floor test for the Maha Vikas Aghadi government.
The political crisis was triggered last week when Eknath Shinde, once a close confidant of Chief Minister and Shiv Sena President Uddhav Thackeray, walked away with a bulk of Shiv Sena MLAs, charging the latter with diluting the cause of Hindutva, the party's core ideology.
Shinde wanted Uddhav to end the tie-up with the Congress and Nationalist Congress Party and join hands with the Bharatiya Janata Party, its former ally with who it fought the 2019 assembly elections
Syed Firdaus Ashraf/Rediff.com spoke to Shrihari Aney, former Maharashtra advocate general, to find out if the governor was right in calling for a trust motion at such a short notice, especially when the Supreme Court had ordered a status quo till July 11.
Was it right on the the governor's part to call for a trust motion considering that the matter was already in the Supreme Court over the suspension of 16 rebel Shiv Sena MLAs and which decision was to come after July 11?
Yes, he was right. I have no reason to believe that he had been prohibited by any order of the Supreme Court.
On the contrary, if you recall when the Supreme Court was granting a stay, the other side argued that if you give them a stay then they will be able to go into a no confidence motion. To which the Supreme Court replied if they do that, then you can come back here again.
It means the Supreme Court was not going to stay the process of the House.
The governor therefore did not do anything that was contrary to the Supreme Court's decision.
The governor has called for the government to prove its majority before the apex court ruled on the deputy speaker's right to suspend the rebel Sena MLAs?
The deputy speaker may have the right, but let us understand that this matter was taken to the Supreme Court and the Supreme Court stayed the matter.
So, it is obvious that they cannot suspend these MLAs.
Also, the right to suspend the MLAs is a very different matter than the ruling party having a majority in the House. These are two different things.
What does the suspension of party MLAs mean then? Here, rebel MLAs are openly taking an anti-party stance and the whip of the party -- does that not count before the law?
According to me, not coming to a private meeting does not justify suspension from the House. This could be enough as action taken by the party, but when you suspend somebody from the House or remove somebody from the House, just understand that you are stopping an elected representative from representing his constituency and the people of that constituency. This is an extremely harsh thing.
I don't think the suspension business is comparable when it comes to voting (in the House).
Deputy Chief Minister Ajit Pawar has Covid as does Chhagan Bhujbal, another minister. In this scenario, the governor has given only one day's time to the legislators to come for voting. Is it not a very short notice?
Let us not be emotional about these issues. Today someone has Covid, then tomorrow someone's grandmother is ill and the day after tomorrow someone's tooth is aching. You cannot give such excuses.
It is a very simple question. Does the government have a majority or not?
This is a simple question that needs to be answered and that will be done on the floor of the House.
Still, one day is too short notice, isn't it?
This (drama) is going on for the last 15 days. Everybody knew this was coming. And now you say short time. Short time for what?
You are to come to the House, cast your vote and go.
By now, every Maharashtra MLA knows which side he is on, whether he wants to vote for the government or against the government.
And it will be proved on the floor of the House whether the government has a majority or has no majority in the House.
It is as simple as that.
The anti-defection law says 2/3rd members of the Shiv Sena have to merge with another party to avoid disqualification. That process has not started and even before that, the no confidence vote been put in motion.
Again, this is about qualification or disqualification, of remaining a member or not of the House.
In the worst case scenario, the 39 rebel MLAs of the Shiv Sena are disqualified from voting during the no confidence motionm but that does not stop 'voting' on the confidence motion.
They all are in Goa today, I believe. And suppose they do not turn up for the no confidence motion. What happens? The voting goes on.
The government will sustain or fail on the floor of the House. It does not matter who comes to vote or who does not, the voting on no confidence motion will go on.
Is it a possibility these MLAs may not turn up for the no confidence motion to avoid disqualification?
It does not matter whether they come or not. The matter is whether the MVA government has the majority to prove it in the House on June 30.
And therefore, I told you that it will not matter if these 39 MLAs are disqualified or not because irrespective of that fact the no confidence motion will go on.
Whether the government has a majority or not in the House will be decided on the floor of the House irrespective of these MLAs being a part of the House or not.
Right now, these 39 Shiv Sena rebel MLAs have made it clear that they are not supporting Uddhav Thackeray. Whether they vote or not for him in the House will be decided in the House.
Will they continue to be Shiv Sena MLAs if they do not vote for the government?
Membership of a House is quite a different thing from membership of a party.
If you are removed from the membership of a party, it does not mean that you are no longer an MLA; unless you are disqualified as an MLA.
These rebels, if they violate party law, then they will be out of the party and if they violate House rules, they will lose their seat.
But so what? It does not mean that the ruling party has the right to be in power if that cannot be demonstrated on the floor of the House.
In 2019 the people of Maharashtra gave the Bharatiya Janata Party a mandate, which was denied by the formation of the MVA. And now again you see MLAs switching sides, possible horse-trading too. What does this mean for our democracy?
This is why the governor's letter is so important.
He says he wants every MLA to stand up and demonstrate the vote that they are casting by proving which side he or she is on.
Secret ballot is out.
Voice vote is out.
You actually stand up and get counted in the House. And when this happens, horse-trading is absent.
The element of secrecy has been removed from voting.
The governor is ensuring and wants MLAs to vote in an open, public, transparent manner.
Do you think going to the Supreme Court was the last option before the government?
They are trying. If they don't try, tomorrow the vote will be on.
Can Eknath Shinde merge these rebel MLAs with Raj Thackeray's Maharashtra Navnirman Sena or some other party?
He may do it if he wants to do it. According to me, it is a non-starter.
The question makes no particular sense at this moment.
Once a government falls or once a government succeeds, the entire picture will be altered.
Who goes where? Who merges with whom? All this is immaterial at this point of time.
