How is the president according to the Constitution?

– Announcements –

The country will choose its 15th president in the elections to be held on the 18th of next month. Draupadi Murmu, of the ruling BJP, and Yashwant Sinha, the joint candidate of the opposition parties, will become our president, but will they have the ability to be the head of the nation according to the Constitution? What kind of president should we choose at the present stage of history? Now this open secret has become even more exposed as the opposition has no field! The cunning shown by Mamta Banerjee on coming to Delhi to take all the initiatives of national politics in her hands, before she could take any color, the matter turned out to be completely disfigured. Its three ports fell rapidly. First fell Sharad Pawar, then Farooq Abdullah and then Gopalkrishna Gandhi. These three ports did not fall because someone was playing bowling directly from the front. All three were ready to be presidents, as long as their victory was guaranteed! Sharad Pawar and Farooq Abdullah are expert players in power politics, but Gopalkrishna Gandhi is a man of a different current. He is not only a skilful administrator, but also a profound scholar of Indian thought and culture. He himself said that if everyone was unanimous on my behalf, I could have played this game without worrying about defeat.

After so much beating, the opposition expressed the name of Yashwant Sinha from the general opinion. This name also comes from the Trinamool Congress. If this name had come before instead of three names, both the decency of the process and the prestige of the opposition would have been maintained, but as I wrote at the beginning, the opposition has no side of its own, so who decency and prestige matter!

The BJP has decided to make Draupadi Murmu, a dedicated worker of his party, the president. Murmu was selected with decency and moderation and what the Prime Minister said in his support also shows how this decision was made. When you have a majority like the BJP and also the certainty that you will turn whoever you want as president, it is easy to practice moderation and decency, but in saying that, the political insight of the party cannot be undermined.

Those who say that the victory of Murmu will seize the tribes of the country, will strengthen the condition of women. It happens? So far we have made all human beings as President, so has the status of human being in the country been strengthened? Have we converted Muslims, Dalits and women as president, so was their status strengthened? It is self-deception that digests politics, not the nation.

Will the Constitution win if they win Murmu or Yashwant Sinha? Will the country have a good president? Yashwant Sinha and Draupadi Murmu are the representatives of this current that veils the power of politics and the power of parties. Yashwant Sinha even resigned from his party in the Trinamool Congress before his candidacy, so the intention of the Constitution would be a bit embarrassing, but Hyabhajpahan and Murmu did not even understand the need for it.

The concept of the constitution is that the head of the political system of the parliamentary system should be a person who is not bound by parliament, does not play power games. The prime minister cannot be such a person, because he makes all sorts of dirty games for the party and power and sits in the chair on that basis. That is why Mahatma Gandhi has written to Hind-Swarajya that he is not even willing to accept the Prime Minister as a patriot, because the basis of any of his decisions is not the interest of the country. He does all the work by saying that his power is in the interest of the country.

Our constitution says very simply that in parliamentary politics, the referee may be the one who does not play on any team. The constitution says the referee’s job is to let the players play and keep a close eye on everyone playing according to the rules. No one got in his way when the referee’s whistle sounded. Is it possible to find and meet such a neutral person? Absolutely possible, but only when you start looking outside the realm of your party and dominant interests; And you can only do that if you take the Constitution as a guide.

The first, second, tenth and eleventh presidents of the 14 full-time presidents we have elected since independence were of this size: Sarveshree Rajendra Prasad, Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan, Kocheril Raman Narayanan and APJ Abdul Kalam. We need a President today in whom all four are coordinated. It is worth noting that these four were people with a special status far removed from party politics.

Rajendra Prasad was one of the leaders who led the struggle for freedom. There is almost no personality of that era who is a soldier in the struggle for freedom, but who is not associated with Congress. In the role of the first guardian of the Republic of India, Rajendra Prasad is unique because he has decided what the president should be like, what he should do, what he should not do, what he should say and what he should not say. Just as Jawaharlal was not only the prime minister of this country in the early years after independence, but was also the architect of the standards of parliamentary democracy, Rajendra Prasad also played a similar role.

He disagreed with the Jawaharlal government on many matters. He didn’t even hide that disagreement. He had raised the first serious debate on the constitutional role of the President of India in his first term and it also created a lot of uproar. He was a far more eminent jurist than his prime minister, but he was always aware that he hammered the constitutional role of the president of India, not Rajendra Prasad, on which this nascent republic must build its structure. All the presidents of India have inherited this responsibility from Rajendra Prasad.

Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan falls into the category of heads of state that was conceived by the philosopher Aristotle. Your example in the You Radhakrishnan Scholarship has never been a dumb or hysterical president. He also maintained the president’s constitutional pressure on Jawaharlal and later on his daughter Prime Minister Indira Gandhi. After the Chinese attack of 1962, the Prime Minister of Jawaharlal was completed, Radhakrishnan was also among those who believed that the President’s special train was stopped at Patna Junction, called Jayaprakash Narayan and told him directly that now no there is time to hesitate to take the reins. of the country.

KR Narayanan was a diplomat, scholar and economist. He was the first Dalit president of the country, very efficient and attentive. Kalam sahib was the choice of Atal Bihari Vajpayee, but he made every effort to become the choice of the country, not the party. He also made the presidency and his style of work democratic. When they took him from the world of science to the world of politics, then politics must have had its own mathematics, but Kalam sahib never played the game of “his” or “inka”. He was called the president of the village because he neither terrorized nor used to intimidate him.

The combination of these four qualities is necessary in the current president because India is going through a critical phase as a democracy and an Indian parliamentary nation. Then there was the challenge of giving a significant form to independence, today there is the challenge of keeping parliamentary democracy on track for 75 years and strengthening its development prospects. It requires patience, skill, erudition, deep knowledge of the Constitution and commitment to it. Today the nation needs a president so don’t look back and forth about the nation and the Constitution, or let it be seen.

Does this possibility appear in the current candidates for the pros and cons? The BJP sees all this in itself and the opposition in its candidate, but they do not make president, they are putting the man of their party in the position of president, so that it works in the interest of his party and power. Tell me, where is the nation in this?

– Announcements –

Leave a Comment