Governor’s Role and Federalism: Upholding Constitutional Morality
(Source: The Indian Express, Editorial Page)
Also Read: The Indian Express Editorial Analysis: 21 June 2025
Also Read: The Hindu Editorial Analysis: 21 June 2025
| Topic: GS Paper 2 – Polity & Governance (Federalism, Constitutional Functionaries) |
| Context |
|
The Incident: What Happened in Kerala?
During the opening session of the Kerala Legislative Assembly, the Governor omitted segments of the policy address prepared by the state government. These segments criticized the Centre’s policies. This deviation from established convention, where the Governor acts merely as a mouthpiece of the elected government, led to significant political and constitutional debate.
Constitutional Position of the Governor
According to Article 163 and Article 166 of the Constitution:
-
The Governor is bound by the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers, except in certain situations where the Constitution gives discretion.
-
The address to the legislature is a constitutional formality; it reflects the policy of the elected government, not the personal views of the Governor.
Issues Raised
| Issue | Explanation |
|---|---|
| Violation of Constitutional Norms | The Governor’s selective reading raises concerns about overstepping constitutional limits. |
| Undermining Democratic Principles | The Governor, a nominated post, refusing to convey the message of an elected government disrupts democratic legitimacy. |
| Politicization of Constitutional Office | Actions such as this reinforce the perception that Governors act as political agents of the Centre. |
| Threat to Federalism | Such practices disturb the quasi-federal structure of the Indian Constitution, which emphasizes cooperative federalism. |
Implications for Indian Federalism
-
Erosion of Trust: Repeated incidents of confrontation between Governors and elected governments reduce mutual trust and stall administrative functioning.
-
Centralization of Power: When Governors act in the Centre’s interest, it fuels accusations of democratic subversion at the state level.
-
Judicial Overload: Many of these confrontations end up in the courts, overburdening the judiciary and politicizing legal interpretation.
Way Forward: Reforming the Role of Governors
To strengthen federalism and uphold constitutional morality, a few key reforms are essential:
1. Implementing Commission Recommendations
| Commission | Key Recommendations |
|---|---|
| Sarkaria Commission (1988) | Governor should be a detached constitutional head, not connected with active politics. State’s opinion should be sought in the appointment. |
| Punchhi Commission (2010) | The Governor must not interfere in day-to-day functioning; greater clarity needed on discretion and dismissal of state governments. |
2. Need for Codification
-
Gubernatorial conduct must be defined more clearly in rules or guidelines.
-
Deviations must be subject to Parliamentary and judicial oversight.
3. Political Consensus
-
Appointment of Governors should involve consultation with the state government to avoid friction.
-
Parties must evolve a consensus that the Governor’s office remains non-partisan and constitutionally neutral.
Conclusion
The Kerala episode is not an isolated one. From Maharashtra to West Bengal, similar tussles have raised alarms about the fragility of India’s federal structure. A Governor must rise above partisan interests and act as a constitutional sentinel—ensuring not only the letter but also the spirit of the Constitution is upheld. For UPSC aspirants, this editorial presents a critical case study on the challenges of cooperative federalism and the evolving nature of Indian constitutional governance.
| Practice Question: (GS-2 | 15 Marks | 250 Words) “The increasing politicization of the Governor’s role poses a threat to Indian federalism.” Discuss with examples. |
