Account for the legal and political factors responsible for the reduced frequency of using Article 356 by the Union Governments since mid 1990s.

Introduction

Article 356 of the Indian Constitution, often referred to as President’s Rule, empowers the Union Government to dismiss a state government if it fails to function according to constitutional provisions. While it was frequently invoked during the initial decades post-independence, its usage has significantly declined since the mid-1990s. This shift can be attributed to a combination of legal safeguards and political developments that have constrained its misuse.

Legal Factors Responsible for Reduced Use of Article 356

• S.R. Bommai Case (1994):
  The landmark judgment by the Supreme Court laid down strict guidelines for the imposition of Article 356, emphasizing that:

  • The breakdown of constitutional machinery must be proven.
  • Judicial review of the President’s Rule is permissible.
  • The floor test is the ultimate test to determine majority in the legislature.
    ★ This judgment curtailed arbitrary dismissals of state governments.

• Strengthening of Judicial Oversight:

  • Post-1990s, the judiciary has actively intervened to check the misuse of Article 356. For instance, the Arunachal Pradesh (2016) and Uttarakhand (2016) cases saw the courts reinstating dismissed state governments.
  • This has created a deterrent effect on the Union Government.

• Constitutional Morality and Federalism:

  • The judiciary has increasingly emphasized the principles of cooperative federalism and constitutional morality, discouraging the Union from undermining state autonomy.
  • Article 356 is now seen as a last resort, not a political tool.

• Role of the Sarkaria Commission (1988):

  • The Sarkaria Commission recommended that Article 356 should be used sparingly and only after exhausting all alternatives.
  • Though not binding, these recommendations have influenced political and legal discourse.

Political Factors Responsible for Reduced Use of Article 356

• Rise of Coalition Politics:

  • Since the 1990s, coalition governments at the Centre have become the norm.
  • The Union Government often depends on regional parties for survival, making it politically unviable to dismiss state governments arbitrarily.

• Strengthening of Regional Parties:

  • The growing influence of regional parties has made it difficult for the Union Government to impose President’s Rule without facing political backlash.
  • Regional parties have also played a key role in shaping public opinion against the misuse of Article 356.

• Public and Media Scrutiny:

  • Increased awareness among citizens and the rise of independent media have amplified scrutiny of the Union Government’s actions.
  • Arbitrary use of Article 356 now risks significant political costs.

• Electoral Repercussions:

  • Misuse of Article 356 has historically led to political backlash. For instance, the frequent use of President’s Rule during the 1970s and 1980s contributed to the perception of authoritarianism, which harmed the ruling party’s electoral prospects.

• Consensus on Federalism:

  • Over time, there has been a growing political consensus on respecting the federal structure of the Constitution.
  • This has discouraged the Union Government from interfering in state affairs unnecessarily.

Value Addition Block — Key Data on Article 356 Usage

Source: Ministry of Home Affairs, PRS Legislative Research

Way Forward

• Strengthening Federal Mechanisms:

  • Institutionalizing mechanisms like the Inter-State Council to resolve Centre-State disputes amicably.

• Codification of Guidelines:

  • Codifying the S.R. Bommai guidelines into law to ensure uniform application of Article 356.

• Promoting Cooperative Federalism:

  • Encouraging dialogue and collaboration between the Centre and states to address governance challenges without resorting to President’s Rule.

• Judicial Vigilance:

  • Continued proactive judicial oversight to prevent any misuse of Article 356.

Conclusion

The reduced frequency of invoking Article 356 since the mid-1990s reflects India’s maturing democracy, where legal safeguards and political realities have combined to uphold the principles of federalism and constitutional propriety. Moving forward, a commitment to cooperative federalism and adherence to judicial guidelines will further strengthen Centre-State relations.