It must be a seriously flawed system that leaves important matters of state to the discretion of an individual. This is the most important lesson from the Supreme Court?s judgment on the dissolution of the Bihar assembly last May. Otherwise, it is a predictable verdict. The apex court?s view of the case had been outlined in its interim verdict last October when it denounced the dissolution as ?unconstitutional? and accused Bihar?s governor, Mr Buta Singh, of having acted in ?undue haste?. The final verdict confirms the interim one, only in stronger terms. It is significant that the court, instead of directly holding the Manmohan Singh government responsible for the dissolution of the assembly, mildly rebuked it for not verifying the governor?s report closely enough. It is possible to argue the Centre?s case from a different angle too. It can be argued that other legal and political complications could arise if New Delhi ignored the governor?s recommendation and acted differently. In fact, the split verdict of the bench points to the possibility of such contradictory interpretations of the governor?s report. The minority view on the bench that absolved both the governor and the Centre of any constitutional impropriety adds to possible confusions over gubernatorial privileges.

Like the judgment itself, political reactions to it have been pretty predictable. The opposition parties, especially the Bharatiya Janata Party, have demanded the resignation of not only Mr Singh but also the prime minister. The Congress, on the other hand, is somewhat relieved that the court took a lenient view of the Centre?s role. But the larger issue seems to have been missed once again. It is not the first time that the court has cried foul over the politicization of the governor?s post. The abuse of the post on political grounds has happened under different dispensations in New Delhi. The latest controversy over the decision of Karnataka?s governor, Mr T.N. Chaturvedi, to give the beleaguered chief minister, Mr Dharam Singh, seven days to prove his government?s majority shows how the problem keeps recurring. Erring individuals, political parties or governments are a minor problem. The real fault lines run deeper in the system.