Revanth’s ‘Big Brother’ praise

Telangana's young Chief Minister A Revanth Reddy’s ‘bonhomie’ with Prime Minister Narendra Modi on Monday triggered an interesting debate not only within the grand old party but also among the general public. Unlike his predecessor and Bharat Rashtra Samiti (BRS) president Kalvakuntla Chandrashekhar Rao (KCR) who caused a lot of embarrassment to the Prime Minister by violating set protocols, Revanth Reddy seems to reverse that?impression among the people. He chose to follow the laid down protocols in the federal structure where the state-centre relations need to be cordial. He not only flew over to New Delhi, no sooner he was sworn in as Chief Minister, along with senior cabinet colleagues, but also held parleys with all those who matter in the Union Cabinet – from PM to Finance Minister to Home Minister – and returned as ‘most satisfied’ state head. He did not mince words when he boasted that he opted to shun the confrontationist path adopted by his predecessor and instead build cordial relations with the Centre in the overall state interests. His approach perhaps might have even stunned his party leadership, as it hated the Prime Minister. This happened when disrespected the Prime Minister and his office by making personal attacks like ‘neech’, ‘mauth ka saudagar’ or 'chowkidar chor hai’, some among many such, to the present jibe of Rashtriya Janata Dal leader Lalu Prasad Yadav's ‘Modi not a Hindu as he did not tonsure his head when his mother expired’ or ‘where is Modi parivar' has been the order of the day.? Against that volatile backdrop and his party’s tirade against Modi, Revanth Reddy calling Modi his ‘Big Brother-like' or his determination to replicate the Gujarat model of development in the 10-year-old Telangana, indeed may not be fathomed by the party leadership. Yet, Revanth Reddy looks more than convinced that only ‘statesman politics’ can help Telangana immensely, even if it costs him personally. His decision to lay a new cordial path with the Centre also appears to be yielding results. His other decision to re-enroll the state in the Central scheme like the farm insurance should not be seen as suspicious. It is bound to ease the state’s financial burden to a great extent. His predecessor KCR, with his greed and arrogance, had destroyed the state-centre relations and also the financial health of Telangana.?And, it also cost him personally as it put a question mark on his party’s very existence. That he was greedy and arrogant is evident from his behavior with the media as well as his party colleagues. More or less, the entire power of the state revolved around his three family members, and his senior colleagues were treated as his slaves. His arrogance not to come to the secretariat and choosing to operate from his farmhouse, forcing the entire bureaucracy to make a beeline for clearing files, explains how he chose to run the state as a modern-day monarch’ or erstwhile Nawab. In sharp contrast, Revanth Reddy appears more accessible to his cabinet colleagues as well as his party cadre and more keen to remain among the people most of the time, indeed systematically enhancing his image as a good statesman-like politician which has become a rare commodity these days, where personal attacks and abuses on the rise. However, one has to wait and see how the party's high command views and conceives his growing admiration and bond with Modi.

No more immunity to lawmakers

A seven-member Constitution bench of the Supreme Court headed by Chief Justice? DY Chandrachud delivered a landmark judgment on Monday declaring that the lawmakers enjoy no immunity under certain Articles. It overturned the 1998 verdict of a five-member Constitution bench, in which it provided immunity to the former Prime Minister PV Narasimha Rao government and Jharkhand Mukti Morcha (JMM) MPs in a bribery case. The JMM lawmakers were accused of taking over Rs 3 crore as a bribe by the Central Bureau of Investigation to save Rao's minority government which was on the verge of collapse when the Opposition brought in a no-confidence motion in 1993. Interestingly, this impacting verdict defines parliamentary privilege and its boundaries, especially about freedom of speech, the right to participate in proceedings of the House, and immunity from legal proceedings in a more defining manner. The Constitution bench has made it clear that the legal protection provided to MPs and MLAs under Articles 105 and 194 of the Constitution does not shield them in cases of accepting bribes for votes or speeches in the House. It says, simply because bribery as such is not rendered immune under Article 105(2) and the corresponding provision of Article 194 because a member engaging in bribery commits a crime that is not essential to the casting of the vote or the ability to decide on how the vote should be cast. And, bribery is a crime and punishable with imprisonment for a term which shall be not less than two years, but that may extend to seven years, and also be liable with a fine. Prime Minister Narendra Modi and several legal luminaries have welcomed the Supreme Court’s verdict, which defines parliamentary privilege and its boundaries, especially regarding freedom of speech, the right to participate in proceedings of the House, and immunity from legal proceedings. Understanding the landmark judgment requires navigating the intriguing journey of the case and the contentious judgment that led the top court to establish a judicial precedent that served as guidelines for future cases involving lawmakers. That may be the reason why the Chief Justice while speaking on the separation of powers of the executive, legislature, and judiciary, the other day, said that while the legislature can enact a fresh law to 'cure the deficiency' in law, it cannot ‘directly overrule’ a court judgment. Added to that the 73-year-old court enjoys as one of the Constitution’s key components that can nullify executive acts, parliamentary laws and amendments to the Constitution.