National

The circumstances of Goa show that the 'secrets' of the political instability of small states

The circumstances of Goa show that the 'secrets' of the political instability of small states

After the formation of the Federal Territory in 1987, Goa has seen changing the CM 20 times so far. It also includes the 2002 incident when Manohar Parrikar became 'Caretaker CM'. Due to the dissolution of the Assembly, Parrikar had to fulfill the responsibility of the Chief Minister for 65 days.

After Manohar Parrikar's demise in Goa, the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) government passed the floor test in the 40-seat Goa Assembly. There are currently 36 MLAs in the Assembly For the majority, the government headed by Pramod Sawant needed 19 MLAs. During the Floor Test, Sawant got together with 20 MLAs, while 15 MLAs voted in the Opposition. In this way Pramod Sawant's government has secured confidence vote with the difference of five votes.

Before Manohar Parrikar's demise, there was a political crisis in Goa. BJP had 13 MLAs, while the Goa Forward Party (GFP) and the Maharashtrawadi Gomantak Party (MGP) had 3-3 MLAs. Apart from this, there were also 3 Independent MLAs and one NCP MLA. At the same time, the Congress has 14 MLAs.

Look at the Floor Test and the results of the last Lok Sabha elections, it is clear that the majority of the ruling BJP government in Goa is slowly falling. Concerns about the political turmoil of the party are increasing.

After the formation of the Federal Territory in 1987, Goa has seen changing the CM 20 times so far. It also includes the 2002 incident when Manohar Parrikar became 'Caretaker CM'. Due to the dissolution of the Assembly, Parrikar had to fulfill the responsibility of the Chief Minister for 65 days.


It is also necessary to mention the tenure of the remaining Chief Ministers here. Congress of Ravi S, Goa Naik is CM for 6 years. For the first time, Naik was only CM for 844 days. Apart from this, Churchill Alemao of Progressive Democratic Front has also been a CM for a short period of time. In 1990, Alemao had run the government for only 18 days. Even Manohar Parrikar, who remained CM for the fourth time in Goa, could not complete his term three times.

Of these, only Digambar Kamath has completed his term as CM. Kamath of Congress party, from 2007 to 2012, was Chief Minister of Goa. However, he could not save his government for the second innings. In 2012 the Congress party lost the assembly elections. Then under the leadership of Manohar Parrikar, the BJP formed the government.

From the tenure of Chief Ministers, it also shows that due to the unstable government, no party was able to achieve the previous majority in the Assembly after 1989.

Similar to other small states like Goa, there is similar political instability. In these small states of five or less Lok Sabha seats, the same CM has not played a long innings like the larger states. Take Arunachal Pradesh for example Here are 6 cms in the last decade. Of these, the existing CM Pema Khandu remains the most disputed.

Khandu took office on July 17, 2016 as a member of the Congress government, but joined the People's Party of Arunachal Pradesh (PPA) two months later. After this, suspended from the PPA and joined BJP. The interesting thing is that all this happened when he retained his position as the Chief Minister. Under President's rule, Arunachal Pradesh has seen a change in the ruling party five times with a period of 24 days.


After Arunachal, now talk about Nagaland. There were four chief ministers in the last decade. However, it is said that there was only one change in the ruling party during this period. This happened when members of the ruling party formed a new party in accordance with the Representation of the People Act and Counter-Opposition. Uttarakhand has also witnessed political instability. In the last decade, five different people took charge of CM in this state. The ruling party also saw political instability twice.

On the one hand, the demand of new small states has been warmed up, on the other hand the condition of older small states is getting worse. When Jharkhand was formed, it was hoped that the oppressed class of the state would get relief, but political instability and corruption did not allow this dream to be fulfilled. The use of making small states has proved to be unsuccessful.

 




LEAVE A COMMENT

Name
Mobile No
Email*
Your Comment *
Top