Differences within the Congress came out into the open over the Narendra Modi Government’s appointment of former Chief Justice of India (CJI) P Sathasivam as the Kerala Governor on Wednesday.
While Congress spokesperson Anand Sharma reiterated the party’s Opposition to the move, former Union Minister Manish Tewari saw no problem with the appointment. In an apparent snub to Tewari, Sharma insisted he was speaking for the party and the Congress too swung into action by backing him and terming the former I&B Minister as “just a panelist”.
The Congress had on Tuesday too slammed the move to appoint Sathasivam as the Governor and wondered whether the Government was “pleased” with his judgement in the BJP president Amit Shah’s case.However, Tewari said there is “no constitutional or legal bar” on a former CJI to accept the position of a Governor. He also said that in early 90s, the Congress had brought a former CJI Ranganath Misra to the Rajya Sabha from Odisha.
At the AICC briefing, when asked if there was lack of clarity in the Congress party on the issue, Congress spokesperson Shobha Oza said Tewari’s views are “personal”. Describing the Modi Government as a “Government of U-turns”, Oza recalled BJP leaders Arun Jaitley and Nitin Gadkari’s 2012 comments against judges getting post-retirement jobs.
“There is total clarity in the Congress. When a spokesperson says anything, that is the official party line. We have made it absolutely crystal clear that whatever Anand Sharma commented on former CJI being appointed a Governor is the official party line. And any other person speaking on various issues is his personal view,” she said.While Oza said Tewari was just a panelist and not a spokesperson and has to articulate and “toe” party line, AICC secretary Tom Vadakkan said a panelist’s duty is to participate in debates. “Panelist is somebody who attends television debates. He does not intervene or give opinions on matters. He is given an official line for discussion. The spokesperson is the voice of the Congress party,” Vadakkan said.
Sharma slammed the move wondering whether there was anything in the former CJI’s “persona, functioning or decisions” that “pleased” the Prime Minister or BJP president.