A governors ludicrous antics

Punjab Governor Salmaan Taseers reaction to PML-Ns demonstrative claim at the Raiwind Farm on Tuesday that it commanded majority in the Punjab Assembly was bombastic, full of zeal that of late had left his assertions. To him it did not matter much if the PML-N has the support of 208 members and thus the right to form a government.
He would invite the PML-N to form the government only if it "agrees to form a coalition with another party". "Since no political party enjoys a clear simple majority in Punjab on the basis of election results, whenever two political parties would agree to coalesce, the governors rule would be terminated and the Punjab Assembly would be summoned," he told reporters. He also warned against what he called the "politics of forward blocs and horse-trading and said it would not deliver a stable government".
Paraphrased, Governor Taseer does not intend to wind up his shop - even though he should be out of business having forfeited his patrons confidence in his ability and potential to deliver. Neither he could frustrate the lawyers long march nor win over enough members to defeat the Sharifs claim to leadership in the Punjab Assembly.
Even if the brazen disrespect he shows to his apolitical office is accepted silently without a protest, it is difficult to agree with his convoluted argument to justify his moves to keep the largest party, PML-N, out of power. His stance is that he would convene the assembly only when two of the three major parliamentary parties - PML-N, PPP and PML-Q - forge alliance showing a visible majority in the house for the ascertainment of the leader of the house (chief minister). But this is not what the Constitution envisages.
The relevant provision, Article 130 (2A), says that the governor shall invite the member of the assembly who commands the confidence of the majority of the members "as ascertained in a session of the assembly summoned for the purpose". There is no provision in the Constitution that anybody has to prove to the governor that such a member or a party enjoys a majority before the session of the assembly is actually summoned. In fact, the governor comes into the picture after the assembly has met and ascertainment made by the speaker. For that matter informal ascertainment that the PML-N enjoys majority has been made available to the governor and the world at large a number of times.
As for the governors warning against floor crossing and horse-trading, the question is, does a member earn disqualification on the basis of his vote for ascertainment? Certainly not, because ascertainment is not election as such. The building block in a democracy is the individual, not the party. It is the individuals that form a party. No wonder, article 130(2A) of the Constitution that deals with the appointment of the Chief Minister, does not refer to parties but to members of the provincial assembly.
Governor Salmaan Taseer is not within his legal and constitutional rights to refuse convening the Punjab Assembly. He has already earned the ignominy of acting unethically, if not illegally, by securing imposition of the governors rule on Punjab. He should not prolong the uncertainty in the countrys largest province any further. His argument that if elected to power with the help of a forward bloc the PML-N government would remain weak and may fall sooner rather than later is illogical too. If it is presumed that all the 32 forward bloc members lose membership consequent to their floor crossing the total strength of the house will be reduced by that number.
Then the PML-N would command majority because its own present numerical strength in the house would constitute the majority of the assembly. By trying to delay the lifting of governors rule Taseer is neither serving the country or his own party. Given the newly acquired faith in their strength to change things - the successful long march is the proof - he must not test the peoples patience.