A governor cannot create a legislative majority in his office. In a parliamentary democracy, the real test of power does not take place through private assurances, letters, or political calculations placed before the governor. It takes place on the assembly floor, where elected representatives must publicly state whom they support. That is the basic grammar of the Westminster system India adopted: the governor invites, the assembly decides.

Tamil Nadu’s hung verdict has now put this principle under stress. Joseph Vijay Chandrasekhar’s Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam has emerged as the single-largest party with 108 seats in a 234-member Assembly, where the majority mark is 118. Congress, with 5 seats, has declared support, taking Vijay’s claim to 113. This does not mean he has already proved a majority, but it does mean his claim is serious enough to be tested in the House.

The governor’s reported insistence that Vijay must first establish the required majority before being invited reverses the parliamentary sequence. A claimant to government is not expected to win a private trial of strength before the governor. The governor may examine who has the most credible claim, but he cannot become the final judge of legislative support. If there is doubt, the answer is not to delay. The answer is to convene the House and let Tamil Nadu’s elected representatives decide.

Discretion is real, but not sovereign.

The governor does have discretion in choosing whom to invite when no party commands a majority, but that discretion exists only to set the parliamentary process in motion and not to decide who enjoys a majority. This distinction is central to responsible government. The Council of Ministers is collectively responsible to the legislative assembly and not to the governor. Therefore, the governor’s satisfaction........

© Indian Express