The Speaker’s verdict pronouncing Chief Minister Eknath Shinde-led Shiv Sena as the original party without disqualifying members from the other faction led by Uddhav Thackeray has compounded the problems. The question being asked now is whose whip will apply?
In public perception, the verdict pronounced by the Speaker on Thursday clearly states that there are two different groups–one Shinde-led Shiv Sena and the other Thackeray-led Shiv Sena (UBT). In such a situation, how can Shinde faction’s whip apply to Thackeray faction?
Speaker Rahul Narwekar, speaking to a TV channel on Friday said, “Shiv Sena (Shinde camp) legislative party, MLAs and its whip Bharat Gogawale has been recognized… The whip of legislative party to which Thackeray camp’s MLAs belong, will be applicable to them.” Thus, emphatically stating that there is only one legislative party–Shiv Sena (Shinde faction)–and its whip will apply to both groups.
The catch here is that the Speaker in his verdict too said, “Shiv Sena (Shinde faction) is the real Sena. So, also its whip is Bharat Gogawale.” However, what cannot be overlooked is the decision of Election Commission of India which categorically considered Shinde’s Shiv Sena and Uddhav Thackeray’s Shiv Sena as two separate political parties/groups and awarding party titles and symbols.
In February 2023, the Election Commission in its order awarded the title Shiv Sena and party symbol bow and arrow to Shinde-led Shiv Sena. At the same time, the EC had given the Shiv Sena (UBT) led by Thackeray a different symbol, flaming torch.
Accordingly, both the factions have been using the title and symbol as decided by EC.
Shiv Sena (UBT) MP Arvind Sawant said, “From the beginning, the entire process of giving legitimacy to Shinde faction has been flawed. All the decisions were taken keeping politics in mind. The authorities have blatantly violated the laid out norms.”
Sawant pointed out, “The Speaker’s verdict upholding Shinde faction as real Shiv Sena is based on party’s constitution.” Their argument is that the 2018 Shiv Sena constitution cannot be considered as it did not incorporate amendments. It tried to differentiate between the role of party leader (Paksha Pramukh) and executive body (Paksha Karyakarani). All these fault findings were just to deny Uddhav Thackeray-led party its legitimate rights, he said.
Sawant wondered if there was a lacuna in Shiv Sena constitution, then why the EC did not question us during elections. Today, they considered 1999 Constitution. There were several elections held after that but nobody took any objections, he added.
State BJP president Chandrashekhar Bawankule said, “Everything is in public domain. The matter related to who is real Shiv Sena had been contested in Supreme Court, EC and Speaker.” In the past, based on documents and rules, EC took certain position, according Shiv Sena’s title and bow and arrow symbol to Shinde faction. The Speaker has in detailed explained why Shinde-led Shiv Sena was the real one. It would be unfair to accuse BJP for these developments,” he stressed.
Notwithstanding the explanation, the BJP cannot explain how a whip of Shiv Sena led by Shinde would apply to Shiv Sena (UBT) which is a different group with different party name and symbol.
Insiders in the party said, “The EC verdict was based on ‘test of majority.” It considered Shinde faction as majority and awarded the original title and party symbol. Now Speaker has reaffirmed by stating Shinde Sena is the real party. So, when it comes to state legislative functioning, Shinde’s Shiv Sena will be considered and its whip applicable to Uddhav Thackeray-led Shiv Sena (UBT). Any defiance would invite disqualification, a leader said.
Former chief minister and senior Congress leader Prithviraj Chavan said the lacuna in anti- defection laws will have to be addressed effectively to stop such a situation. All these problems have arisen because those in power (BJP) have very conveniently exploited the loopholes in the anti-defection laws.
An expert in the legislative proceedings, meanwhile, said, “Two-third MLAs’ defection was mandated to make split in political parties difficult. Along with this, there was a clause that the two-third MLAs should merge in a party. Now, Shinde along with 40 MLAs out of total 56, split from party. But instead of merging in any party he claimed his was real party. And finally he had his way if we consider EC and Speaker’s order.”
Thackeray has decided to contest the Speaker’s order in Supreme Court.