INTER-STATE COUNCIL MEETING CONCLUDES
The Eighth meeting
of the Inter-State Council was held on 27-28 august, 2003 in Srinagar.
The Prime Minister chaired the meeting. Besides the Deputy PM,
Union Ministers of Defence, Power, Law & Justice and Labour,
the Chief Ministers of many States and Union Territories, Lt Governor
and Administrators of other Union Territories were present in
the meeting. Some of the Chief Ministers who could not attend
the meeting were represented by their senior Ministers.
This is for the first
time that a meeting of the Inter-State Council has been held outside
Delhi since its inception in May, 1990.
The meeting began
with introductory remarks by Deputy Prime Minister. He mentioned
that now that the task of consideration of the Sarkaria commission’s
recommendations has almost come to an end, the forum of Inter-State
Council can be utilised for discussing larger issues of common
and general interest among the States and between the Union and
the States. This stands endorsed in the meeting.
The Prime Minister,
in his inaugural address, emphasised that dynamics of social,
economic and political forces has undergone substantive change
since the Sarkaria Commission submitted its report way back in
1988. Centre-state relations have improved and a sense of partnership
has emerged. He, therefore, urged all the members to bring the
discussion on Sarkaria Commission’s recommendations to a final
and consensual conclusion at the Srinagar meeting.
Mentioning about
‘Good Governance’, the Prime Minister remarked that people were
demanding a higher level of performance by the governments they
have elected. He wanted Inter-State Council Secretariat to focus
on monitoring of the ‘Action Plan on Good Governance’ both in
quantitative and qualitative aspects.
The Prime Minister
called upon the Chief Ministers and the Union Ministers to place
fresh issues and ideas for deliberations in this forum. In this
direction, the task and reach of the Council needs to be widened
with provision of adequate manpower and funds at its disposal.
The agenda items
were then taken up for discussion. The recommendation of Sarkaria
Commission for adoption of cautious approach in respect of power
of the union to give directions to the States under Articles 256
and 257 of the constitution and application of sanctions under
Article 365 in the event of non-compliance of such directions
was discussed. One view expressed was that since Article 356 already
existed, Article 365 in its present form seemed redundant. The
Council, however, took note of the fact that till date, Union
Government has never issued directions under Articles 256 and
257 and no proclamation under Article 356 has been issued based
on Article 365. The scheme of the Constitution suggests that before
rushing to issue a proclamation under Article 356, all other possible
avenues should be explored. It should be first ensured that Union
had done all that it could do in discharge of its duty under Article
355. The Council also took note of the observations of Dr. B.R.
Ambedkar in the Constituent assembly, who had supported the incorporation
of Article 365 as it conferred power to the Union to take action
when there was failure to carry out directions under Articles
256 & 257. Every right has to be followed by a remedy. If
there is no remedy, the right is reduced to a paper right having
no meaning.
The Council observed
that the remedy provided in Article 365 is less harsh than that
in Article 356. Retention of Article 365 is necessary as it acts
as a screen to prevent any hasty resort to drastic action under
Article 356. It was decided to retain Article 365 and to accept
Commission’s recommendation for a cautious approach before its
application.
Regarding ‘Emergency
Provisions’, the Council observed that the safeguards contained
in the Bommai Judgement, which has already become part of the
law of the land, are adequate to prevent misuse of Article 356.
It was decided that the Union Government could consider incorporating
suitably the essential features of the Bommai judgement in the
Constitution.
Based on the
views of the Standing Committee, the Council took the following
decisions in regard to the Commission’s recommendations on ‘Emergency
Provisions’:-
- The Commission’s recommendation
that Article 356, should be used as a measure of last resort
was accepted.
- The Council was of the opinion
that where the imposition of Article 356 was necessitated by
certain facts for which the State Government was accountable,
these facts be brought to the notice of the state Government
and its response obtained where the context so required.
- As regards the Commission’s recommendation
relating to appointment of caretaker government, the Council
noted that the practice in India so far was that if a government
was defeated on the floor of the house, it should not continue
in office. On this ground, the council did not accept the Commission’s
recommendation.
- The Commission’s recommendation
that the Legislative Assembly should not be dissolved before
the Proclamation has been laid before the parliament and the
Parliament has had an opportunity to consider it was accepted.
- The Council decided to accept
Commission’s recommendations that material facts and ground
on which Article 356 is invoked should be made an integral part
of the Proclamation issued under that Article.
- The Commission’s recommendation
that Governor’s report be in the nature of a ‘speaking document’
was accepted.
In the context
of the provisions in Article 355 laying down the duty of the Union
to protect every State against ‘external aggression’ and ‘internal
disturbance’, the council observed that in an emergency situation
threatening the security of the country prior consultation with
the State Government before deploying Union Armed Forces in that
State suo motu, would not be possible. However, in other circumstances,
it would be desirable to have consultation with the State Government,
as recommended by the Commission, wherever feasible, even though
it is not obligatory. The Council decided to accept the Commission’s
recommendation for introduction of a system of interchange of
the officers among the Union and State Armed Police Forces. It
was however, of the opinion that large-scale transfer of officers
may not be feasible.
As regards the
issues concerning contract Labour/Contract Appointments, the Union
Labour Minister informed the Council that the Group of Ministers
on Labour Reforms has arrived at a consensus on the draft Bill
to amend the Contract Labour (Regulation & Abolition) Act,
1970. The draft Bill would be finalised in consultation with the
Union Ministry of Law & Justice for taking further necessary
action. The labour reforms suggested in the draft Bill were long
overdue. These would help in consolidating the ongoing economic
liberalisation process.
Summarising the
discussions on the subject, the Deputy PM stated that the trend
was in favour of transfer of subjects relating to labour laws
from the Concurrent List to the State List and that it was a welcome
move. In the meanwhile, an Inter-Ministerial Standing Committee
would be established to expeditiously clear the amendments to
be proposed by the State governments in various labour laws.
The Council took
note of the Action Taken Report on the recommendations of Sarkaria
Commission submitted by the Secretariat. Out of total 247 recommendations,
the Council has so far taken decision in respect of 230 of which
170 have been implemented, 7 are at various stages of implementation
and 53 have not been found acceptable. The balance 17 recommendations
have been deliberated upon in this meeting. It was, therefore,
decided that the work relating to Sarkaria Commission should be
wrapped up and that the forum of Inter-State Council should be
hereafter utilised for sorting out important issues of co-operative
federalism and socio-economic concerns.
In pursuance
of the recommendation of the Group of Ministers constituted in
the year 2000 to look into the ‘Reforming the National Security
System’, the Council considered a draft ‘Action Plan on Good Governance’
having certain broad parameters including issue of Multi-purpose
National Identity Card (MNIC). It was decided to appoint a Sub-committee
of select Chief Ministers to deliberate further on the issue and
come out with a blue print of Action Plan which could be discussed
in the next meeting of the Council.
