THE imposition of president’s rule in Uttarakhand and the dismissal of the Harish Rawat government is a blatant attack on democracy, constitutional norms and states rights by the Modi government. Coming after the imposition of president’s rule in Arunachal Pradesh a few weeks earlier to facilitate a government with defectors from the Congress and the BJP, the Modi government has shown that it will utilise the draconian Article 356 of the constitution to topple non-BJP state governments, utilising any opportunity available. Article 356 of the constitution has been a weapon in the hands of the central government to arbitrarily dismiss elected state governments and to advance the political interests of the ruling party at the centre. The most notorious example of this was the dismissal of the EMS Namboodiripad ministry in Kerala in 1959 by the Congress government headed by Jawaharlal Nehru. Since then Article 356 was used repeatedly as a political instrument by the Congress governments at the centre. A patently undemocratic and authoritarian clause, Article 356 requires only a report from the governor to say that there has been a breakdown in the constitutional machinery in the state. The central government has used pliable governors appointed by it to get such reports whenever required and act upon it. That is why, the CPI(M) has consistently opposed the use of Article 356 by the central government. It has advocated that Article 356 should be scrapped and replaced with a suitable clause which will not give the freedom to the centre to act arbitrarily. On the basis of the experience gathered over the years, there was only one instance when the Party supported the imposition of president’s rule and dismissal of elected state governments. That was in 1992 after the demolition of the Babri Masjid. In Uttar Pradesh, after accomplishing the dark deed, the Kalyan Singh ministry of the BJP resigned. So president’s rule was imposed. The central government also imposed president’s rule in Madhya Pradesh and Rajasthan also where the BJP state governments had actively aided and assisted the sending of karsevaks to Ayodhya. The demolition of the Babri Masjid went against the basic secular principle of the constitution and the Supreme Court verdict that nothing should be done to alter the status quo at the disputed site. The demolition of the Babri Masjid unleashed a wave of communal violence and disrupted communal unity and the secular fabric of the country. It is in this context that the CPI(M) supported the imposition of president’s rule in these states. It was subsequent to this that the CPI(M) and the other Left and secular opposition parties argued in the Inter-State Council that Article 356 should be amended/modified so that it can be invoked only if there is a threat to national unity or the principle of secularism in a state. The Congress party which is the victim of Article 356 in Arunachal Pradesh and Uttarakhand should at least now realise how its partisan and cynical use of Article 356 in the past has damaged the democratic and federal set up in the country. The BJP government is following the same path. In Uttarakhand, the imposition of president’s rule came one day before the chief minister was to test his majority on the floor of the assembly. This was being done as per the direction of the governor that the chief minister should prove his majority by March 28. The question arose because nine Congress MLAs had defected and joined hands with the BJP. The speaker of the assembly disqualified these nine MLAs from the membership of the house under the anti-defection law. When it became clear that the chief minister would get a majority in the house after this disqualification, the union cabinet hurriedly met the day before the vote and recommended imposition of president’s rule. The BJP government is targeting other Congress state governments for toppling. The BJP general secretary, Kailash Vijayavargiya, has announced that “rebellions are going to happen in Congress-ruled states across the country”, targeting the state governments in Himachal Pradesh and Manipur immediately. The use of Article 356 is part of the authoritarian drive to bring states under the mercy of the central government. All opposition parties should realise the threat posed by the authoritarianism of the BJP government and resist these attacks unitedly. On the basis of the petition filed by the chief minister Harish Rawat, a single-member bench of the Uttarakhand High Court had ordered that a floor test be conducted to determine who has a majority in the assembly on March 31. The court had also permitted the nine disqualified MLAs to cast their vote and these will be kept separately. The High Court had asserted this right step to be taken as per the Bommai judgment of 1994 by the Supreme Court. This judgment had clearly set out the parameters under which Article 356 can be invoked. The judgment had clearly said that floor test in the assembly must be the final arbiter nor the governor or the centre’s whims and fancies. However after the central government went in appeal against this verdict before a division bench, it was decided not to conduct the floor test on March 31, but wait till the court hears the matter finally before a decision is taken. Whatever the outcome of the High Court proceedings, it will be better if the Supreme Court without delay pronounces on the validity of the imposition of president’s rule in both Arunachal Pradesh and Uttarakhand. By all criteria, the Modi government’s actions have violated the Bommai judgment. The Left and democratic forces should take a longer view and demand that Article 356 itself be scrapped and replaced with some appropriate provision which will safeguard the rights of the states and the federal principle. (March 30, 2016)