The Role of the Governor in State Politics in India: Focus on Bihar

The position of the Governor in India, particularly in states like Bihar, is often a subject of debate. While the Governor is meant to be a constitutional head of the state, his role and influence in state politics can sometimes blur the line between ceremonial duties and active political involvement. This raises the question: Is the Governor merely a puppet, or does he have real power?

1. Constitutional Role of the Governor

Under the Indian Constitution, the Governor acts as the representative of the President of India in the states. His role is largely ceremonial, with executive, legislative, and judicial powers defined by the Constitution.

• Executive Powers: The Governor appoints the Chief Minister and other ministers, who are required to hold office as long as they enjoy the confidence of the state legislature (Article 164).
• Legislative Powers: The Governor can summon or dissolve the state legislature, assent to bills, and can also promulgate ordinances when the legislature is not in session (Article 213).
• Judicial Powers: The Governor has the power to grant pardons, reprieves, respites, and remissions of punishment, or to suspend, remit, or commute sentences in certain cases (Article 161).

2. Governor’s Influence in Bihar’s Politics

In states like Bihar, the Governor’s role has often been contested. The relationship between the state government and the Governor has sometimes been tense, with the Governor accused of acting beyond the bounds of his constitutional powers. For example:

• Political Appointment of the Chief Minister: The Governor is responsible for appointing the Chief Minister. However, this power has been controversial in instances where the Governor delays the swearing-in of the Chief Minister, as seen in Bihar in the past, creating a political standoff. This was seen in 2015 when Governor Keshari Nath Tripathi took time in deciding whom to invite to form the government, despite the fact that Nitish Kumar had the majority.
• Dissolution of the State Assembly: Governors have occasionally been accused of using their powers to dissolve the state assembly prematurely. In Bihar, this has been seen in instances where the Governor’s action, such as not providing assent to bills passed by the assembly, has raised questions about impartiality.

3. Is the Governor a Mere Puppet

While the Governor has substantial powers as per the Constitution, his actions are often influenced by political considerations, especially at the state level. Critics argue that in some cases, the Governor may act under the influence of the central government, especially when the ruling party at the Centre is different from the ruling party in the state.

• Central Influence: The Governor is appointed by the President on the advice of the central government, which means the Governor’s actions are often aligned with the party in power at the national level. This was evident in Bihar during various political crises, where the central government’s interests sometimes influenced the Governor’s decisions.
• Puppet or Mediator: Some see the Governor as a puppet in the hands of the central government, especially when his decisions seem to align with political expediencies rather than constitutional duties. For example, during times of political instability in Bihar, the Governor’s role in forming the government or dissolving the assembly has raised eyebrows about his impartiality.

4. Case Study: Bihar’s Political Landscape

Bihar provides an illustrative case where the Governor’s role has been under scrutiny. Several instances in recent history demonstrate the tension between the state government and the Governor:

• 2017 Political Crisis: When Nitish Kumar resigned as Chief Minister in 2017 and later re-formed a government with the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), the Governor’s role in accepting or rejecting the change was heavily scrutinized. Many accused the Governor of acting as a puppet in the hands of the central government rather than exercising independent judgment.
• Appointment of Governors: In Bihar, as in other states, the appointment of the Governor has often been a point of contention. Political parties have occasionally viewed the Governor as a political tool, especially when decisions seem to favor the ruling party at the Centre.

5. Conclusion: A Balance Between Constitutional Role and Political Influence

While the Governor’s role is largely ceremonial, his actions can significantly influence state politics, especially during times of political uncertainty. In states like Bihar, the Governor’s position is often more than just a puppet; he can act as a mediator in resolving conflicts. However, due to the political context and the Governor’s appointment by the central government, his role can sometimes seem compromised, raising questions about his impartiality.

The Governor should ideally maintain a balance between his constitutional duties and the political realities of the state. When this balance is disrupted, it can lead to tensions and criticisms of the Governor as merely a tool in the hands of political forces, rather than an impartial guardian of the Constitution.