GOA POLITICAL CRISIS DEMOCRACY GOA-ING GOA-ING GONENorms? Only susegado!The reason Goa politicians behave the way they do is because they feel they can get away with it.');//-- >UDAY BHEMBRE ');//-->
Posted online: Thursday, February 10, 2005 at 0000 hours IST Several things have been tarnishing the otherwise fair image of Goa; but nothing causes irreparable damage like the greed for power of politicians who have neither love for democracy nor respect for the Constitution. The sordid drama that was played out in the hall of the Goa Legislative Assembly on February 2 was the latest attack of this malaise. In the last week of January the BJP-led coalition government in Goa lost its majority as four party MLAs resigned from the party, giving up membership of the Legislative Assembly, and two ministers, one of the MGP and the other Independent, quit the government and the coalition. Consequently, the strength of the coalition was reduced from 24 to 18 in a House of 40 members. As the effective strength of the House was 36, the ruling coalition had lost majority outside the House and in the House it was in minority as soon as the Speaker, who belonged to the BJP, occupied his chair. The local leaders of the Congress demanded dismissal of the Manohar Parrikar- led government; while the government sought a floor test. Governor S C Jamir was fair enough and convened the sitting of the Assembly for a vote of confidence on February 2. In the House, just before the vote, Speaker Vishwas Satarkar ordered that Independent MLA Philip Neri Rodrigues leave the House for unruly behaviour, when he was sitting quietly in his seat. The Opposition protested; but the Speaker called the marshal to physically remove Rodrigues from the House. The Opposition members surrounded Rodrigues and prevented the marshal from removing him. The Speaker then called a posse of police, who removed him forcibly. This led to pandemonium in the House. In that confusion, the Speaker put the motion to vote and declared that it is carried by 18 to 6 votes. Governor Jamir had given a chance to the Parrikar-led government to prove its majority; but the ruling coalition misused the opportunity to manipulate the vote by resorting to undemocratic and unconstitutional methods through the Speaker. What is the truth? It will be worthwhile to trace the sequence of events since the Assembly elections of May 2002. There was no clear mandate for any party. The results were BJP: 17; Congress: 16, UGDP: 3, MGP: 2, NCP: 1 and Independent: 1. Parrikar formed the government along with three UGDP and two MGP MLAs and 1 Independent. It was a coalition, but it was not given any name, there was no common minimum programme and there was no coordination committee either. However, Parrikar felt insecure right from the day of formation of the government. He, therefore, embarked upon a political plan to engineer defections from the UGDP and MGP to the BJP to convert the coalition government into a BJP government. He knew that the MLAs of the two regional parties and the Independent MLA could desert the coalition easily and at any point of time and that as BJP MLAs, defecting again from the party would not be possible. Parrikar put his plan into operation before the Tenth Schedule of the Constitution was amended. He was partially successful as out of five MLAs of the regional parties, only two defected to the BJP. They were Monserrate of the UGDP and Pandurang Madkaikar of the MGP. That raised the strength of the BJP in the House to 19, still two short of absolute majority. After the amendment of the Tenth Schedule, defections resorted to in the manner earlier described was not possible. Parrikar, therefore, enticed a Congress MLA, Isidore Fernandes, to resign from the Congress and to contest the same seat on a BJP ticket. Fernandes was elected, but it only helped the BJP reach the halfway mark of 20. Thereafter, dissensions developed within the coalition and added to it was the threat of disqualification of two BJP MLAs, Rajendra Arlekar and Dayanand Mandrekar, against whom election petitions are lying before the Panaji Bench of the Bombay High Court. Parrikar once again felt insecure and vulnerable. Recent developments described below are consequences of that increased insecurity. On January 27, Parrikar precipitated the fall of his own government. He got the outfit of UGDP(Secular) MLA Mickey Pacheco merged into the BJP. He had earlier unceremoniously sacked Pacheco from his ministry. That very day he stripped one of his ministers, Atanasio Monserrate, of his main portfolio of Town and Country Planning, probably to cut him to size. But Parrikar underestimated Monserrate’s clout and the extent of dissent that was brewing within the coalition. Two days later, four BJP MLAs resigned from the party (and from the Assembly too) and two ministers, one of the MGP and the other Independent, deserted his government to make common cause with the Opposition, which seized the opportunity to form a Congress-led United Legislature Party having 18 members. This strength was equal to that of the ruling coalition (17 BJP + 1 UGDP). The ruling coalition had clearly lost the majority. Following democratic conventions, Parrikar ought to have gracefully resigned. He did not and boasted instead that he would prove his majority on the floor of the House. Having exhibited the bravado that he would prove his majority on the floor of the House, Parrikar put another plan into operation, namely to get Independent MLA Philip Neri Rodrigues disqualified by hook or by crook. Two BJP MLAs filed a disqualification petition alleging that Rodrigues had joined the BJP in October 2002. The Speaker was to do the further dirty work. The Speaker summoned Rodrigues four hours before the sitting of the House. Apparently, the initial purpose was to frighten Rodrigues and to bring him back. But that purpose having failed, Parrikar, through Speaker Satarkar, tried to prevent him from voting in the House by asking him to leave the House under a rule which was, by all accounts, not applicable. This was deliberate because in order to ‘win’ the confidence vote, the strength of the Opposition had to be reduced to 17. That would result in a tie and the Speaker would have the casting vote. Governor Jamir is right when he says that the Speaker had virtually murdered democracy and that he (Jamir) acted in order to uphold the Constitution. The painful and shameful episode of February 2 is a manifestation of greed for power, which leads to immoral, illegal and undemocratic acts by unscrupulous politicians. One of the reasons that could have encouraged Parrikar and his colleagues to resort to this highly condemnable conduct is that they had earlier got away with such undemocratic and unconstitutional acts on various occasions in the absence of a strong deterrent. This time they did not succeed because a vigilant governor was occupying Raj Bhavan at Dona Paula. The writer is president of the Goa Konkani Akademi (Today's Indian Express) - Forwarded by www.goa-world.com _______________ "Appurbai Ghara koddem, Nhuim Voddea koddem!" KUDOS TO T-BUSH FILM 'THE LETTER' - excellent presentation! Goa's finest www.colaco.net www.supergoa.com www.goa-world.com Gulf Goans e-Newsletter yahoogroups.com/group/gulf-goans/ Moderator Gaspar Almeida/Presented by Uly Menezes, archived at: www.goa-world.com/goa/ since 1994. Thanks for the continued support of the www.goa-world.com/goa/ team.