India's President-elect Ram Nath Kovind is only the second Dalit President of the country. He won comfortably by cornering 66 per cent of the Presidential electoral college while his rival, another eminent Dalit politician, Meira Kumar got 36 per cent votes.
The result of the
presidential election held on 17 July was just a requirement for Kovind to take
over India's apex constitutional job and the coveted Rashtrapati Bhawan at the
Raisina Hills in Delhi. But since he is the only second Dalit President in the
country, he would obviously be compared with the first Dalit President of
India, K R Narayanan who was in office from 25 July 1997 to 25 July 2002.
Former President K R
Narayanan, described by Jawaharlal Nehru as the best diplomat of the country,
was known as a pro-active President with an official run that saw landmark
active presidential interventions and three of them stand out, his flat no to
the then BJP led Atal Bihari Vajpayee government on the Constitution's review
in favour of Presidential System in India, his conscious decisions of returning
the Union Cabinet advice on imposing the President’s Rule in states and his
advocacy for weaker sections for their under-representation in Indian judicial
service.
THE CONSTITUTION'S REVIEW
The National Democratic
Alliance (NDA) government led by Atal Bihari Vajpayee had to dilute the terms
of reference of the National Commission that it had constituted for the
Constitution’s review in 2000. After stern message from Narayanan who would go
on to say that “we should examine whether the Constitution has failed us or we
have failed the Constitution”, that any Constitution review process could only
be undertaken within its basic framework only, preserving the sanctity of the Parliamentary
System of India, the Atal Government was forced to change the basic mandate of
the National Commission from ‘the ‘Constitution’s review to review the working
of the Constitution’ with an assurance that the ‘review will be done without
interfering with the basic structure of the Construction’.
The other most visible change
that the former President’s tough stand brought was on who was going to head
the National Commission to review the Constitution. Atal Bihari Vajpayee and
his deputy L K Advani, reportedly, had requested former President R
Venkataraman, a strong proponent of the Presidential System, to head the National
Commission. But Narayanan's reservations on the Presidential System, coupled
with objections from the BJP allies like DMK and TDP on Venkataraman, the
government had to shed the idea. Then it zeroed in on the name of the former Chief
Justice of India (CJI) and former National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) Chairman
M N Venkatachaliah. But Justice Venkatachaliah only agreed to head the
commission after given assurance that the basic structure of parliamentary
framework of the Constitution would not be touched and his decision would
prevail in recruiting the other ten members of the Commission.
REFUSED TO APPROVE IMPOSITION
OF PRESIDENT’S RULE IN UTTAR PRADESH AND BIHAR
This one is a fine example to
see how President Narayanan rose above party politics to upheld the dignity of
the post that required, theoretically, unflinching loyalty to the Constitution
and unwavering impartiality in dealing with the political parties irrespective
of the previous political affiliation.
In October 1997, President
Narayanan returned the union cabinet decision on imposing President’s Rule
under Article 356 in Uttar Pradesh for reconsideration. The United Front Government
was led by Congress' I K Gujral. It didn’t matter for Narayanan while returning
the decision that he was a career Congress politician brought into politics by
Indira Gandhi and was a Union minister in the Rajiv Gandhi cabinet. Gujral
government respected his decision and the BJP led UP government of Kalyan Singh
escaped the dismissal.
Almost a year after it, in
September 1998, Narayanan returned the Union Government’s file on imposition of
the President’s Rule in Bihar. The government in centre was of BJPs’, led by
Atal Bihari Vajpayee which had recommended the dismissal of the RJD government
in Bihar led by Rabri Devi. In a series of dramatic developments, the Rabri
government was able to demonstrate that numbers were in its favour – 182 MLAs
in a legislative assembly of 325 members. The then NDA government had based its
decision on imposing the President’s Rule in Bihar citing corruption and
Constitutional breakdown in the state but the clear majority in the Bihar
assembly in Rabri Devi’s favour could not override President Narayanan’s
conviction that dismissing an elected government in the case would be akin to
acting against people’s mandate and thus violating the spirit of the Constitution.
These two decisions of
President Narayanan remain unparalleled in the Indian political history. They
effectively established the credibility of the institution of the President of
India that it was not mere a decorative position with a rubber-stamp President
to follow the diktats of the government of the day but an institution that
housed the soul of the Indian Constitution.
ADVOCACY FOR WEAKER SECTIONS
IN THE INDIAN JUDICIARY
K R Narayanan was vocal about
under-representation of Dalits in the higher judiciary. He would often question
the judges' appointment and transfer process in the High Courts and the Supreme
Court, something that even invited confrontation with the judiciary. Narayanan
on record had said even if deserving candidates from the weaker sections were
available, they were ignored.
He had written in November
1998, "I would like to record my views that while recommending the
appointment of Supreme Court judges, it would be consonant with constitutional
principles and the nation's social objectives if persons belonging to weaker
sections of society like SCs and STs, who comprise 25 per cent of the
population, and women are given due consideration."
Though the then CJI strongly
refuted it ruling out any caste-based discrimination in the appointments in the
higher judiciary, two successive CJIs, A M Ahmadi and J S Verma, had failed to
recommend elevation of any High Court Dalit Justice to the Supreme Court, before
CJI M M Punchhi recommended Justice K G Balakrishnan who was then the Chief
Justice of the Gujarat High Court for the Supreme Court in March 1998.
After the strongly-worded
suggestion from Narayanan, the judicial circles started trying to figure out
whom the President was referring to but CJI A S Anand, who succeeded Punchhi
refused to elevate Balakrishnan as he was 53 then while the minimum age for the
elevation to the Supreme Court was 55 as per the judicial convention being
followed. Though exceptions could have been made for meritorious candidates, the
Supreme Court Collegium ruled out doing so in Balakrishnan's case who was
finally elevated to the top court in June 2000 after he turned 55 in May 2000.
LIKE NARAYANAN, KOVIND, TOO, COMES FROM A HUMBLE BACKGROUND
President-elect Ram Nath
Kovind, too, comes from a humble background as President Narayanan. They both
had their share of struggle before they started on the path to success in life.
Kovind though may not have as illustrious a career as Narayanan had who was an
IFS officer, a career diplomat, a union minister and the Vice-President before
becoming the President of India, he has been a successful lawyer, practicing in
India's apex court for years.
And like Narayanan, he has
also earned a reputation of playing by the rule book while being Governor of
Bihar. Bihar chief minister Nitish Kumar is all praise for him the way he has discharged
his gubernatorial responsibility in the state. Like Narayanan, he has been
speaking for the weaker sections going as far as to join agitation against laws
that he considered anti SC/ST. His clean and non-controversial record will only
help him.
Let's see if he can follow in
the footsteps of K R Narayanan, extending the legacy of the Presidents who
restored the credibility of the institution. In his post-victory speech, an emotional
Kovind said he was going to the Rashtrapati Bhawan as a representative of every
Indian citizen who worked hard to arrange for an evening meal. Let's see where
his conscience drives him.
©SantoshChaubey
