Battle for Raisina Hill

By: Prionka Jha

It is an all out war for the top post of the country. Hectic activities are on by political parties to garner support for their respective candidates. But what is appalling, this time, is the level of mud-slinging the political parties have resorted to that somehow seems to have affected the dignity of the event. It is no longer restricted to a battle for Raisina Hill but seems to be a contest for the 2009 Lok Sabha elections. The very mention of ‘President of India’ evokes the image of a person of strong character with an impeccable background. The ceremonial post is comparable to that of the monarch of United Kingdom. He is a mere figurehead. But the sullied campaign this time has somewhere affected the sanctity of the top office. People and media are questioning and counter enquiring the integrity, character and promise of the key presidential candidates – Pratibha Patil (UPA) and Bhairon Singh Shekhawat (Independent supported by NDA), who are in the thick of controversy for their respective public conduct. Pratibha Patil’s recent controversial remarks and her past association with a sugar factory have earned her discredit and put a question mark on her very persona. It is also being reported that she might by interrogated in V G Patil murder case. Moreover, it should not be forgotten that her husband too is accused of mistreating a school staff, who later committed suicide. So, will all the legal wrangling involving the would-be ‘first-man’ be addressed to the Rashtrapati Bhavan.

Meanwhile, Bhairon Singh Shekhawat’s past record is not very spectacular either. He too is referred by Left leaders as the ‘first corrupt cop’ of independent India. But fact of the matter is that both Congress and BJP want their respective candidate at the helm with their eyes fixed on the impending parliamentary polls. The role of the President would then become important. In the last 60 years of India’s independence, this is not the first time that the presidential elections have been marred by controversy. In 1954 Dr. Rajendra Prasad had differences with Jawaharlal Nehru over the Hindu Code Bill. This case was referred to the Attorney General, who expressed that Council of Ministers is supreme and binding on the President. The Supreme Court upheld this view. This led to an amendment in the Constitution as a provision to this effect was made in it. Despite this entire episode, Rajendra Prasad still got a second term. Similarly, the presidential election of 1969 turned into a dramatic test of strength for rival factions. Prime Minister Indira Gandhi set a precedent when she supported an Independent candidate V V Giri against the official Congress candidate Sanjiva Reddy. She exhorted her party’s MPs and MLAs to vote according to their conscience and V V Giri became the President. Indira Gandhi, by picking V V Giri, set a trend of sorts that the President can be a stooge of the ruling party. And the glaring example of this was President Fakruddin Ali Ahmed, who showing his loyalty to Congress Party, signed the proclamation in 1975 enforcing national emergency even before the Cabinet met to take the decision. However, late President Giani Zail Singh tried to toe a different line when he refused to give his assent to the controversial Postal Bill passed by Parliament that gave sweeping powers to the state to intercept mail. This was considered as a revolt by the President who was supposed to be Congress Party’s rubber stamp. In 1991, Venkataraman withheld assent to the Pension Bill passed by the outgoing Parliament that gave pension benefits to themselves as per the advice of the then Prime Minister- the President’s office citing it to be self-aggrandisement. He too differed from the precedent of Presidential loyalty to the ruling party. And recently, President Kalam exercised Article 111 and returned the Office of Profit Bill for reconsideration that led to resignation of Sonia Gandhi from the chairmanship of National Advisory Council. Perhaps such incidents added to the worry of UPA, and particularly of the Congress, to once again go for a candidate with unflinching loyalty to the party. Though the President is elected indirectly, he or she should conserve and restore the sanctity and appropriateness of the office and should not succumb to pressure of politics. In short, the President should not consider himself or herself as the first citizen of the country but the first loyal servant of the nation without any sense of obligation to the political establishment.