Governor’s Address: Insights from R. Venkataraman’s Perspective

Introduction

The recent episode in the Tamil Nadu Assembly, where Governor R.N. Ravi declined to deliver the customary address, has reignited debates surrounding the significance of the Governor’s Address.
He actually walked out in response to an insult of National Anthem in TN Assembly.

Constitutional mandate: Articles 87 and 176 of the Constitution confer authority upon the President and Governor, respectively, to address the legislature.
Occasions for Address: The addresses are reserved for two specific occasions: the commencement of a new legislative session post-election and the inauguration of the annual legislative session.
Significance: Termed the President’s or Governor’s Address, these speeches are pivotal for initiating legislative proceedings.

Prescribed Duties: Article 176 delineates the Governor’s obligation to address the Legislative Assembly at the onset of each legislative year and post-general elections, with both Houses convened if a Legislative Council exists.
Procedural Norms: Established rules govern the time allocated for deliberating the address’s contents, ensuring parliamentary discourse.

Cross-National Comparison: Analogous provisions are observed in democratic nations worldwide.
State of the Union: In the United States, it manifests as the “State of the Union” address (1790), while in the United Kingdom, it is the Queen’s Speech (1536), heralding the parliamentary year’s commencement.
Indian Context: India’s Presidential Address mirrors the British model, reflecting the ceremonial role of the President, a sentiment echoed during the Constitution’s framing by Dr. B R Ambedkar.

Legislative Agenda: The President’s or Governor’s speech encapsulates legislative proposals and government policy initiatives, coupled with a retrospective glance at previous accomplishments.
Government Input: Inputs for this address are curated from various government ministries, embodying the administration’s agenda.

Constitutional Mandate: Governed by constitutional mandate, both the President and Governor are obligated to adhere to the Cabinet’s advice (1950) in their functions, including address preparation.
Policy Reflection: Hence, the address is meticulously crafted by the government, serving as a reflection of its policy stance.

Adherence to Protocol: While refusal to deliver the address is impermissible, deviations from the prepared script are permissible.
Instances of Departure: Instances of Governors veering off the scripted path have transpired, although such actions remain rare for Presidents.

Legal Precedent: The Supreme Court, in Shamsher Singh v. State of Punjab (1975), underscored the President’s (or Governor’s) adherence to Cabinet advice across functions.
Contested Discretion: While discretion to modify the speech is contested, any departure from parliamentary norms may invoke debate.

Venkataraman’s Critique: R. Venkataraman, who served as President from 1987 to 1992, vehemently opposed the practice of Presidential and Governor’s addresses, deeming it a “British anachronism” and a “meaningless formality.”
Calls for Constitutional Amendment: Venkataraman repeatedly urged PM Rajiv Gandhi and Chandra Shekher to abolish this tradition through a Constitutional amendment, emphasizing its lack of relevance and inherent biases.

Government’s Voice: Venkataraman viewed the address as a mere reflection of the ruling regime’s perspectives, rendering Presidents and Governors mere “mouthpieces” devoid of independent expression.
Controversies and Criticism: He expressed dismay over controversies surrounding Governors’ addresses in states like Maharashtra and West Bengal, condemning the opposition’s heckling of figures like Governor Nurul Hasan.
Symbolic Adjustments: Venkataraman, in presenting his maiden Presidential address in 1988, advocated for subtle changes like replacing “My government” with “The government,” aligning with India’s constitutional ethos framed by the people.
Legacy of British Colonialism: He underscored the incongruity of retaining British-era conventions in India’s democratic framework, emphasizing the need for symbolic adjustments to reflect the nation’s sovereignty.

Symbol of Governance: The tradition of Presidential and Governor’s addresses, rooted in constitutional mandate, and symbolizes the fusion of ceremonial protocol with legislative functionality.
Executive-Legislative Nexus: As integral components of democratic governance, these addresses underscore the synergy between executive authority and parliamentary accountability, while navigating the delicate balance between tradition and evolving norms.