Goa slips into headless mode one more time as Chief Minister Manohar Parrikar flies once again to New York, USA for treatment of his pancreatic ailment. Back from New York a week ago, he was to fly Thursday morning as per a communique from the Chief Minister’s Office that also says he is ‘absolutely fine’ but is travelling to USA to avoid complications. Another message later in the day said that the Chief Minister would be returning from New York next week. There is, therefore, certainty that the Chief Minister will be away from the State for at least a week, if not longer. Who heads the government in his absence?
The question is valid as this is the third time the Chief Minister is flying to the US for treatment since March this year. The first time he had appointed a three-member cabinet advisory committee to tide over matters in his absence. He had been away three months, returning in June. The second time, earlier this month he delegated powers to his Principal Secretary to take charge of the administration and was away for about two weeks. This time there is yet no official communication on who will hold charge during his absence, but late in the night it was revealed that he will not appoint any minister as in charge in his absence.
In such instances, the norm in government is to hand over charge to another minister in the absence of the Chief Minister or if the Chief Minister is unable to perform his regular functions. In the case of Goa, this charge has not been delegated, instead officers have been given the powers. Just two days earlier, Town and Country Planning Minister Vijai Sardesai had said that the there was an impact on the administration due to the absence of the Chief Minister, but had qualified it by saying that the damage is minimised by the delegation of powers to the officers. That, delegating powers to the officers, is a strange arrangement as the charge should have gone to another cabinet minister. Even if this delegation is acceptable to the coalition partners, how democratic is this action of giving the charge to officers?
The fact that in the past two instances no minister was appointed as caretaker chief minister indicates that there either exists a dearth of leaders in the ruling coalition or that the Chief Minister does not have enough trust and confidence in any of his ministers to appoint them to hold charge in his absence, or that there is no unanimity among the coalition partners.
The differences among the coalition partners were visible to all when the Chief Minister had to back down from his decision to appoint the PWD Minister to hold charge in his absence as this arrangement was not acceptable to the other coalition partners. But there are differences on making alternative arrangements within the BJP too. Union Minister Shripad Naik spoke of the future and of arrangements to be made in the absence of the Chief Minister, but received no support from any other BJP member. The team even returned from Mumbai, without going to Delhi.
Though earlier files may have been electronically sent to New York for the Chief Minister’s clearance, the State shouldn’t be made to remain without a head for long periods of time. It is imperative that some arrangement is made to keep the wheels of governance moving, without having to depend on electronic clearance from a hospital bed. During his earlier trip three-month stay in the US, cabinet decisions were taken via circulation, which though a legitimate process is hardly the best democratic means to arrive at decisions. The State needs its constitutional head of government, or charge given to another minister, for democracy to be upheld.
