The Governor of Kerala and the state government are again at odds. This is the second major conflict between the two this year. The first, earlier this year, concerned the governor’s speech to the state legislature. The governor’s address is written by the government. Governor Arif Mohammad Khan, while delivering the speech in the legislative assembly, paused before reading a paragraph of the speech. The paragraph referred to the Kerala government’s opposition to the citizenship amendment bill. Interrupting the speech, Governor Khan said he was of the opinion that the paragraph did not relate to policies or programs. But he continued to read the paragraph to honor the prime minister’s wish despite his disagreement.
The current conflict is regarding the convocation of the state legislature. The Kerala government made a recommendation to the governor to convene the state legislature for a one-day session. The government wanted to discuss the situation derived from the protest of the peasants in the legislative assembly. Media reports suggest that the governor rejected the government on the grounds that there is no emerging situation for which the state assembly should be called to meet on short notice. Earlier this year, the governor of Rajasthan had rejected the recommendation of Prime Minister Ashok Gehlot’s government to convene a session. The prime minister wanted a session of the legislature to be called so that he could demonstrate his majority on the floor of the chamber.
The Constitution is clear: the government has the power to call a session of the legislature. The council of ministers decides the dates and duration of the session. Their decision is communicated to the governor, who is constitutionally bound to act on most matters with the help and advice of the government. The governor then calls the state legislature to meet for one session. A governor’s refusal to do so is cause for concern. Such events require careful deliberation to prevent them from snowballing into a constitutional crisis. But the events in Kerala and Rajasthan are an aberration. They should not distract us from the sad record of the sessions of the state legislatures in the country.
In the past 20 years, state assemblies across the country, on average, met for less than 30 days a year. But states like Kerala, Odisha, Karnataka are an exception. The Kerala Vidhan Sabha, for example, has met on average 50 days a year for the past 10 years. The trend across the country is for legislatures to meet for longer budget sessions at the beginning of the year. Then, for the rest of the year, they meet in fits and starts upholding the constitutional requirement that there should be no six-month interval between two sessions of a legislature. The blame for the decline in session days of state legislatures rests with the government.
Legislatures are spaces for debate and for giving voice to public opinion. As institutions of accountability, they are responsible for asking difficult questions of government and highlighting uncomfortable truths. Thus, it is in a state government’s interest to call smaller sessions of the legislature and avoid their scrutiny. Fewer days in session also means that state governments are free to enact laws through ordinances. And when legislatures are called, there is little time for MLAs to examine the laws that are presented to them.
Continuous and close scrutiny by legislatures is essential to improve governance in the country. Increasing the number of business days for state legislatures is a first step in increasing their effectiveness. One way to do this is by convening legislatures to meet throughout the year. In many mature democracies, a fixed schedule of legislative sessions is announced at the beginning of the year, with breaks in between. It allows the government to plan its calendar to introduce new laws. It also has the advantage of increasing debate and discussion time in the legislative assembly. And with the legislature meeting throughout the year, it gets rid of the politics surrounding the calling of sessions of a legislature.
This article first appeared in print on December 25, 2020 under the title ‘Lawmakers Must Work’. The author is the head of legislative research for PRS.
.
