Two major events in the recent past have defined politics in Maharashtra. On February 17, the Election Commission of India (ECI) allotted the name ‘Shiv Sena’ and the party’s bow and arrow symbol to Maharashtra Chief Minister Eknath Shinde’s faction in effect recognising it as the original party founded by Balasaheb Thackeray.
On May 11, the Supreme Court of India said it cannot adjudicate petitions for disqualification by the members of the legislative assembly under the Tenth Schedule (which deals with disqualification on the grounds of defection) of the Constitution of India and said the Speaker shall recognise the Whip and the Leader who are duly authorised by the Shiv Sena political party.
In an interview to The Hindu, the Speaker of the Maharashtra Legislative Assembly, Rahul Narwekar talks about the questions before him and says, “I am not bound by the decision of the ECI and I will take the decision independently.”
Which principles and provisions will you be following to decide on – who has the authority to appoint the Whip and who should be recognised as the Whip?
I will have to follow the provisions of the Tenth Schedule of the Constitution. I will also have to follow the Rules prescribed under the Maharashtra Members of the Legislative Assembly Disqualification on the grounds of Defection Rules, 1986 and I will have to abide by the guidelines set by the Supreme Court in the judgment.
What would you consider to be your limitations as the Speaker in this unique situation?
The scope of the Speaker has been widened in this case where the Court has also asked me to look into who was the political party in July 2022.
What modus operandi will you adopt to decide the political party?
There are guidelines set out by the court in the judgment. There are various precedents which have been put forth in deciding who represents the political party by looking into the party’s Constitution, the organisation’s structure, representative’s structure, any other factors relevant at that time.
The Supreme Court has said, “The Speaker and the ECI are empowered to concurrently adjudicate on the petitions before them under the Tenth Schedule..”
Yes. Therefore I have to decide independently on the decision. I am not bound by the decision of the ECI and I will take the decision independently.
The Supreme Court has asked you to decide the matter in a “reasonable period”, how would you define that?
There is going to be no intentional delay at the same time there will be no hurry.
