The Goa Governor S.C. Jamir dismissed the 32-month-old Manohar Parrikar-led Bharatiya Janata Party coalition government on Wednesday evening (2nd February 2005). The irony is that this happened minutes after the Government won the vote of confidence on the floor of the State Legislative Assembly. 

It makes mockery of our democracy. The constitution respects the vote of confidence made only on the floor of the assembly and no where else. When this is the case, when a government demonstrated the confidence of the House on the floor of the Assembly, it was dismissed soon after that. Albeit controversial, the vote of confidence cannot be disregarded like this. If it is controversial, there are mechanisms to address this. The Governor first asked the government to prove its strength on the floor of the House. And to enable this, the Governor asked the Speaker to conduct the special Assembly session and send him a report immediately on the status of the majority enjoyed by the coalition government led by BJP. Even if he was displeased with the government on any other count, he has the only option to convene the Assembly. He could have straight away invoked article 365 and dismissed the government if he was displeased with the government in a 'not-so true democracy' (as it has happened umpteen times in our country). Instead, this Goa Governor made the Speaker to convene the special Assembly session, but he did not wait for the report from the Assembly. What is the hurry for him to dismiss the government? The whole episode conveys an impression that Governor had the doubt only on the majority enjoyed by the coalition government in the aftermath of resignation by few MLAs. And other than this apprehension, he did not seem to have anything else against this government. However, things took dramatic turn and Governor wanted to dismiss this government at any cost.

When the vote of confidence was in favour of the government, what is the rationale to dismiss the government? If the Governor is not happy with the rigour of this exercise, he could have prescribed a way forward to convince himself of the strength of the sitting government 'again on the floor of the House'. He should have dismissed the government only after clearly establishing his belief to be the fact to the nation, if he believed that this government had lost the confidence of the House. Instead, he sends a one-line order immediately after the vote of confidence was polled in the Assembly, that reads as follows: "In exercise of powers vested under Article 164(1) and other enabling provisions of the Constitution of India, I, S.C. Jamir, Governor of the State of Goa, do hereby withdraw my pleasure and accordingly dismiss Shri.Manohar Parrikar as Chief Minister of the State of Goa." This is a high handed approach and nothing less than the murder of democracy. This is not to say that the BJP led coalition government established its strength beyond doubt. It is only argued that the Governor has equal onus to prove to the country that the government of the day has lost the confidence of the House before he embarked onto dismissing it. The governor had not only disregarded the House, but also the entire nation and our democracy. It's a clear case of violation of our Constitution.

It makes even the neutral citizens of this country to suspect whether all these was pre-meditated. When the crucial vote of confidence came up before the House in the later half of the day and the opposition could vote out the government, what was the need for the opposition members to meet the Governor prior to this exercise? The governor should not have entertained this discussion and should have advised the Opposition to respect the session and prove their point of view in the House. The Governor could withdraw his pleasure only when the Chief Minister loses the confidence of the House. This is the only way we could preserve our Federal system. If the Governor can get displeased with the sitting government for no reason or without giving any reason, what is the difference between the way the Nepal King dismissed his government and the way the Goa governor dismissed the elected government? All these days, we have been vociferously suggesting that the strength of the government should be proven to the President/Governor on the floor of the Parliament/Assembly and not anywhere else or through the letters or lists of supporters. We even went to the extent of saying that Raj Bhavan's are not the place to show the majority and it is ONLY the Floor of the House which is the correct place to prove the strength. But here is a case where the vote of confidence happened on the floor of the House but could not win the pleasure of the Governor. It is a shame to all those who believe in democracy!

Once Mr. Venkataraman, our former President remarked that President of this Nation is like an Emergency Torch-Light which should go on only when the electricity supply fails. He gave this analogy to convey a significant point that only when things are going glaringly wrong, the President should get into action. Otherwise he must facilitate the functioning of democracy by being a silent and meticulous observer. This author pleads to our highly respected present President Dr Kalam to ponder over whether such a situation has come up today. He must order his appointee, the Goa governor, to prove his action (to be correct) to the whole nation. If he fails to do so, the President must withdraw his pleasure towards the present Goa Governor. The nation expects the Congress to concentrate on nation building instead of playing its age old tricks and games in subverting democracy.