Why 'Union' or 'Centre' debate angers BJP

Tamil Nadu does it again by raising a few critical questions on the working of Indian federalism. The raging debate of whether India is a Union of states or the states are merely administrative units with the Union empowered to supersede the states' authority is timely. Although it may appear as an acrimonious political debate between the parties like Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) and the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), there is a constitutional guideline on this subject that is as clear as the daylight.

Indian Constitution Part I- Article 1 states that India, that is Bharat, shall be a Union of States, thereby implying the indestructible nature of its unity with no provision for secession under the Constitution. Then why is the BJP protesting against the DMK for calling the Union government as Union government? Why is it asking the DMK to address the Union government as Central government while there is no such reference in the Indian Constitution itself?

More curious is that Tamil Nadu is not alone in advocating that India is a Union of States. More political parties and states are espousing this line. The revival of this debate is unsettling for the BJP because of its ideas of nation and nationalism. There are no contradictions in their view of Hindutva, centralization of power and authority and the practice of one nation and one tax policy. All these variants can be cemented by their self proclaimed patriotism that tolerates neither debate nor dissent.

The Preamble of the Indian Constitution clearly demonstrates the federal form, spirit and content of the Indian Constitution with an open acknowledgement of the centralizing tendencies and the quasi-federal characteristics in the actual working of the Constitution. There are also well-defined grounds and guidelines for enforcing the powers and authority of the Union over the states. But what has happened since the adoption of our Constitution is the erosion of states' powers has become a routine practice by successive governments in New Delhi.

Read: Is it the Union or the Central Govt? DMK ignites the debate in Tamil Nadu

The term "in certain circumstances" became a common practice than an uncommon usage and application of the Union's power and authority over states. There is no exception during the Congress rule or the BJP holding the reins of the Union government. Worse is the extreme negligence and the poor precedents set by the Congress and BJP ruled states in turn by surrendering their rights silently without a word of dissent or even a mild record of disagreement. This is how the constitutional reference of 'Union' has been altered in practice to appear as 'Centre'. It has happened without any legal or constitutional sanctity over this transition.

We should also keep in mind that India is not a classical federal model, and there are sufficient provisions to inform of its quasi-federal nature and characteristics. The Union is empowered, in certain circumstances, to supersede the authority of a state or to exercise powers otherwise vested with the states.

The seventh schedule (Article-246) of the Constitution contains the Union List with 97 items, State List with 66 items and Concurrent List with 47 items. The successive Union governments have exploited the centralizing tendencies of the Constitution not only concerning the Concurrent List but also in the State List, e.g., agriculture and education.

The GST Bill 2017, the New Education Policy 2020 and the Farm Bills 2020 have exposed the depth of isolation of states and the absence of broader national consensus over such critical issues concerning the entire nation. The Narendra Modi-led BJP government at the Union has handled these subjects as though states do not matter. There is an element of brutal indifference to the pleas of the states.

Instances of this are the Union government's unresponsiveness to Tamil Nadu's appeal against NEET (National Eligibility cum Entrance Test), Punjab's challenge to the farm bills, and the genuine demand from several states to settle the GST dues on compassionate grounds.

How West Bengal Assembly elections were held in eight phases has revealed the extent of political and structural control the Union government can exercise upon the conduct of an autonomous and quasi-judicial body like the Election Commission of India, especially during a strenuous period, like the Covid crisis, which had gripped the state and the country at large.

On the one hand, DMK, besides its electoral success in the Parliamentary elections-2019 and the Assembly elections-2021, is undoubtedly on a revival path and wants to reinvent its ideological roots. On the other, the Modi government's handling of the corona crisis and the vaccine policy has not only exposed the weak links in the Union government's governance structure and communication but poor coordination with the states.

The low trust combined with electoral defeats in West Bengal, Kerala and Tamil Nadu in the recent Assembly elections held in April-May 2021 has raised the prospects of opposition unity with the bench strength of Maharashtra momentum. Uttar Pradesh shows signs of complete failure in terms of deliberations over governance, and the cracks within the BJP are becoming more visible.

Thus the changing ground realities, low trust of the people and the subtle shifts in states' responses to the Union government due to financial crisis are too intense for the BJP to hide behind the guise of Hindutva, Hindu nationalism and patriotism. It is, therefore, necessary for the BJP to introspect why and how the calling of the Union government as 'Union government' is illegal or unconstitutional and even anti-national.

(Ramu Manivannan is a Professor and Head of the Department of Politics and Public Administration and the Director of the Centre for Dravidian Studies and Research, University of Madras)

Disclaimer: The views expressed above are the authors’ own. They do not necessarily reflect the views of DH.