Governor holds no veto power over Bills, says SC

Governor holds no veto power over Bills, says SC

Subject :Polity

Section: Legislature

Context:

• While examining the constitutional authority of the Governor in withholding assent to a bill, the Supreme Court has issued a crucial verdict outlining a governor’s obligations when withholding assent to a Bill.
• Chief Justice Chandrachud highlighted that keeping a Bill duly passed for indeterminate periods contradicts constitutional principles, emphasising the importance of prompt action.

Governor’s Obligation

• The Supreme Court ruled that when a governor withholds assent to a Bill, it’s mandatory to promptly send it back to the State legislature.
• This action must be accompanied by a message necessitating the legislature to reconsider the Bill.

Legislature’s Authority

• The court emphasised that the ultimate decision on accepting the Governor’s advice belongs exclusively to the legislature.
• The Governor’s message does not bind the legislature, as indicated by the expression “if the Bill is passed again with or without amendments.”

Constitutional Democracy Principles

• The court warned against the risk of a Governor virtually vetoing a duly elected legislature’s functioning by withholding assent without further recourse.
• Such a scenario contradicts the fundamental principles of constitutional democracy.

Expedition Requirement

• The court stressed that the Bill should be sent back to the Legislature “as soon as possible” with the mandatory message.
• The expression “as soon as possible” was deemed a “constitutional imperative of expedition,” and failure to act promptly was deemed inconsistent with constitutional language.

What are the Governor’s Powers w. r. to Passage of Bills?

• The governor’s powers with respect to the passage of bills are defined by Article 200 and Article 201 of the Constitution. According to these articles, the governor has the following options when a bill is presented to him/her by the state legislature:
• He/she may give assent to the bill, which means the bill becomes an act.
• He/she may withhold assent to the bill, which means the bill is rejected.
• He/she may return the bill (if it is not a money bill) to the state legislature with a message requesting reconsideration of the bill or some of its provisions.
• If the bill is passed again by the state legislature with or without amendments, the governor cannot withhold assent to it.
• He/she may reserve the bill for the consideration of the president, who may either assent to or withhold assent from the bill, or direct the governor to return the bill to the state legislature for reconsideration.
• The reservation of the bill by the governor is mandatory if the bill endangers the position of the state high court.
• It is also discretionary if the bill is against the provisions of the Constitution, the Directive Principles of State Policy, the larger interest of the country, or of grave national importance, or deals with compulsory acquisition of property under Article 31A of the Constitution.

What are the Challenges associated with Governor’s Office?

• The Appointment of Governors: The governor is appointed by the president on the advice of the central government. This raises questions about the political neutrality and impartiality of the governor.
• There have been instances where governors have been appointed from the ruling party at the centre or have been removed or transferred for political reasons.
• This undermines the dignity and stability of the office of the governor.
• The Role and Powers of Governors: The governor has various roles and powers under the constitution, such as giving assent to bills passed by the state legislature, appointing the chief minister and other ministers, sending reports to the president on the state of affairs, and exercising special responsibilities in some states.
• However, these roles and powers are often subject to the discretion of the governor, which can lead to conflicts with the elected state government.
• There have been cases such as Tamil nadu’s where governors have delayed or withheld assent to bills, dismissed or dissolved state governments, recommended president’s rule, or interfered in the functioning of state universities.
• These actions have been criticized as arbitrary, partisan, or unconstitutional by the state governments or the opposition parties.
• The Accountability and Immunity of Governors: Although the governor is supposed to be the President’s analogue at the state government, the reality is that they have been, and continue to be, the agents of the Union government, sent to keep a check on popularly elected state governments.
• The governor can be removed from office at the pleasure of the Union government.
• The governor is secure in the knowledge that as long as they do as they are told by the Union government, they will continue to hold their positions. As heads of state, they are not even answerable to the courts for their actions while in office (Art 361).