The incident of June 30, 2001 gave a glimpse of revenge politics. The drama of the post-midnight arrest of former chief minister of Tamil Nadu M Karunanidhi points to the degeneration of political culture into personal vendetta. It set off a political storm threatening to snowball into a major crisis involving the State and the Central Government in a dramatic confrontation. Tamil Nadu was under the grip of a visual regime. For some 36 hours, people all over the country were forced to watch the same versions of clippings by the Sun TV.

All this brouhaha brings one thing to the mind, the relevance of Article 356, whether the State governments can do as they like and whether the Center can use it to settle old scores also? Indian Constitution is a federal Constitution. An ideal federation is one in which the constituent units enjoy maximum autonomy. In India, the makers of the Constitution picked up the idea of Article 356 from the Government of India Act, 1935 and introduced it in the Indian Constitution. It is an irony that the Government of India Act of 1935, which was passed by the British Parliament, became the foundation of many articles of the Constitution. Article 356 of the Indian Constitution is similar to Section 93 of the Government of India Act, 1935. The Joint Parliamentary Committee on Indian Constitutional Reform (1933-34) explained the provisions in Section 93 where similar power to assume sole responsibility of administration of the Province had been conferred on the Governor in case of a breakdown of the machinery of the Provincial Government.

Constitution, Article, political, Committee, confrontation, constituent, crisis, federation, administration, Provincial, autonomy, accordance, relevance, regime, immunities