Quest for federalism

Shifting balances in Centre-state relations

by Ranbir Singh

(November 23, New Delhi, Sri Lanka Guardian) Having recognised India’s pluralist and multi-regional character, the founding fathers of the Constitution had opted for a federal system and rejected unitary system. They felt that a model of nation building that will accommodate various caste, tribal, religious, cultural, linguistic and regional groups in the power structure will suit India best.

However, following Partition and the problems of communalism and secessionism on the one hand and the external threats from Pakistan and China and the threat to our sovereignty from the pressures of power blocs led by the USA and USSR on the other, the founding fathers favoured a federal system with a strong Centre.

The system worked smoothly despite shifting balances in Centre-state relations till 1967 due to the Congress’ dominance at the Centre and in the states. The formation of unstable coalitions of non-Congress parties in many states during 1967-1971 created new tensions. The misuse of Article 356 by the Governors kicked off a major controversy. The echo for greater autonomy reverberated in many states. The Planning Commission’s role, too, was questioned. These brought the issue of restructuring the federal system on the centrestage.

The revival of Congress dominance in the 1971 Lok Sabha elections due to Indira Gandhi’s charisma, her radical steps like bank nationalisation, abolition of privy purses, politics of populism and slogans of Garibi Hatao and Samajvad Lao pushed the issue of restructuring the federal system into the backburner. The disillusionment with the non-performance of the coalition governments, too, were instrumental in this development. The only exception was the adoption of the Anandpur Sahib Resolution by the Akali Dal in 1973. Even this resolution was not pressed.

However, the end of inner-party democracy in the Congress, centralisation of all the powers in the hands of Indira Gandhi and the emergence of extra- constitutional authority of her son Sanjay Gandhi, reduction of the Chief Ministers’ status to that of subedars once again revived the demand for restructuring of the polity. This amply found expression in the JP-led movement for Total Revolution in 1975.

The imposition of Emergency on June 26, 1975 brought with it a host of problems. The emergence of one-party system and the authoritarian rule of Indira Gandhi, Sanjay Gandhi and his cronies converted India virtually into a unitary system. This trend was institutionalised through the 42nd Amendment in 1976. This controversial Act, enacted on the recommendations of the Swaran Singh Committee, had virtually changed the basic structure of the Constitution and strengthened the authority of the Prime Minister in particular and the Centre in general.

After the change of power and the end of Congress dominance, the Janata Party emerged as a credible national alternative to the Congress at the Centre. This triggered a fresh debate on restructuring the Indian federal system. However, the CPM, the Akali Dal and the DMK did not pursue with the demand at that timebecause the regional parties got a share in the power structure at the Centre and in the states.

Indira Gandhi’s return to power in the 1980 Lok Sabha elections with a promise to provide a ‘Government that Works’ and the people’s disillusionment with the Janata experiment once again revived the demand for restructuring the federal system. The manner in which she centralised all powers in her hands and her style of functioning, often in a confrontation mode, largely contributed to this.

Her deviation from the path of secularism also contributed to this phenomenon. This explains the demand for greater autonomy of states by all the national Opposition parties. The Dharam Yudh of the Akali Dal on the issue of Anandpur Sahib Resolution, the genesis of militancy and the rise of the demand for Khalistan have to be seen in this perspective. The Assam Movement, too, could be viewed in the same way.

The rise of the Telugu Desam and Janata Party-Kranti Ranga combine to power in Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka respectively in 1983 should be perceived as reactions against centralisation of power and as a reflection of the quest for federalisation. Indira Gandhi’s strategy of confrontation in Punjab and Assam strengthened this urge. Her decision of appointing the Sarkaria Commission in 1983 for re-examining the Centre-state relations proved too insufficient in this context.

The re-federalisation of Indian polity was initiated after the 1984 Lok Sabha elections by Rajiv Gandhi who succeeded Indira Gandhi. This was evident from the Punjab Accord and Assam Accord in 1985, his promise to restore inner-party democracy and his attempt to get the Constitution (64th Amendment) Bill passed for adding the third tier to Indian federalism by constitutionalising the Panchayati Raj Institutions and Urban Local Bodies. However, his agenda remained incomplete due to various factors.

The emergence of a federalised or a regionalised multi-party system in the 1989 Lok Sabha elections due to regionalisation of Indian politics on account of the cumulative impact of the process of modernisation, politicisation and economic development did bring about a change in the federal structure. Regional parties got partnership in the power structure at the national level. This was evident from the replacement of the single-party government of the Congress by the coalition governments headed by V.P. Singh and Chandra Shekhar during 1989-1991.

The Mandalisation and the Mandirisation of politics in 1990 further changed the contours of the federal system. While Mandalisation was a centrifugal trend which strengthened regionalisation of politics, Mandirisation was a centripetal trend which sought to homogenise the polity by establishing the hegemony of the Hindutva forces. It is a different matter that its logical outcome was horizontal and vertical fragmentation of the polity on communal lines.

The revival of the Congress rule under P.V. Narasimha Rao after the 1991 Lok Sabha elections changed the contours further due largely to four factors. First, the adoption of the New Economic Policy, together with liberalisation, privatisation and globalisation shifted the centre of federal system from New Delhi to Washington.

Secondly, the Narasimha Rao government’s failure to prevent the demolition of Babri Masjid and the communal riots that followed had created new challenges before the polity. Cross border terrorism and the rise of international terrorism exacerbated the problem. Thirdly, the continued militancy in Jammu and Kashmir due to many acts of omission and commission continued to defy solution. And finally, the Naxalite movement assumed a dangerous character over the years.

Clearly, these problems could be tackled only by political solutions. More important, national consensus, which became elusive after the emergence of the Bipolar-Multiparty system and the formation of coalition governments since 1996 Lok Sabha elections, is the need of the hour. The signing of the Indo-US nuclear deal has added a new dimension to the federal system. This has further shifted the centre of the federal system to Washington, Vienna and the capitals of the 45-member Nuclear Supplies Group countries.

The writer, a former Professor of Political Science, Kurukshetra University, is currently Consultant, Haryana Institute of Rural Development, Nilokheri (Karnal) - Sri Lanka Guardian