Editorial Analysis (3rd Jan): Raj Bhavan Needs Radical Reforms

Context: The Governor of Kerala has been criticised for actions such as ordering the removal of protest posters, labelling student activists as criminals, and touring Kozhikode without prior announcement.

Limits To Immunity

• Article 361: This constitutional article provides Governors with limited immunity. They cannot be held legally accountable in courts for the official exercise of their powers or for actions done in their official capacity.
• Exceptions to Immunity: This immunity does not extend to actions by Governors that are unrelated to their official duties. Misconduct not connected with official tasks is not shielded from judicial review.
• Supreme Court’s Stance: In the case of Rameshwar Prasad v. Union of India (2006), the Supreme Court stated that the whimsical and motivated conduct of a Governor, particularly in recommending Presidential rule in Bihar, was subject to judicial scrutiny. This ruling implies that Governors can be held accountable for misuse of power.
• Governors’ Extra-Constitutional Actions: The question of immunity for Governors’ actions beyond constitutional boundaries was not directly addressed in the Rameshwar Prasad case, but the court emphasised the importance of selecting the right individuals for the Governor’s role to maintain the sanctity of the post.

We’re now on WhatsApp. Click to Join

Commission Reports

• Sarkaria Commission Report (1988): This report expressed concerns about some Governors failing to exhibit impartiality and wisdom, as expected from their position.
  • It noted that many Governors, anticipating further roles under the Union government or political careers post-tenure, acted more like agents of the Union rather than impartial functionaries.
  • The Commission recommended that Governors should be detached figures, not deeply involved in the local politics of their respective states.
• Justice M.M. Punchhi Commission Report (2010): This report advised that to fulfil their constitutional obligations impartially, Governors should not be burdened with roles and powers beyond what the Constitution envisages.
  • It highlighted the issue of Governors being appointed as chancellors of universities, which could potentially involve them in controversies or public criticism.
  • The report cited the specific example of Kerala, where the State Assembly passed a bill to remove the Governor’s chancellorship.
  • The Governor did not assent to the bill and referred it, along with others, to the President, an action that lacked democratic legitimacy according to the report.

Sharing is caring!