news details |
|
|
| Covid-19 and changing profile of Indian Federalism | | | Dr. Rajkumar Singh
The most heartening element of India’s response to the coronavirus disease (Covid-19) has been the close collaboration between the Centre and states. To be sure, there have been differences too. But rarely, if ever, has the federal structure been put to test as it is being done now. And this is because of the constitutional design. The Centre can frame broad policies; it can make national-level assessments; it can provide support, be it in terms of health care facilities or economic packages. But states are in the frontlines of the battle. Health is a state subject; so is law and order; and the entire ambit of daily administration at the local level — be it through local district magistrates or developments officers or district hospitals — happens through the state government. But there have now been three video conferences between the prime minister and the CMs. In the latest one, on Saturday, while expressing their support for an extended lockdown, states asked for help — from requesting that donations to the CM Relief Fund be considered as corporate social expenditure to more availability of testing kits and personal protective equipment for health workers; from relaxations in fiscal deficit norms to the payment of compensation under the Goods and Services Tax regime; from a greater economic package for diverse sectors to fiscal support for states. The Centre must consider all these requests favourably, for it is both a question of the rights of states and the need of the moment.
Constitutional position of Centre-State relations
The constitutional scheme in India envisages a healthy working relationship between the Centre and the states. Certain subjects fall exclusively in the domain of the Centre under the Union List. Then there are subjects such as health that are enumerated in the State list. Any subject in the Union List on which a law is passed by Parliament, such a law is required to be implemented by the states. Likewise, any law passed by the state has to be implemented within that state. The only exception is if the High Court concerned or the Supreme Court directs otherwise vide an order or judgement. However, one expects that on matters of national importance, such as the coronavirus situation, politics would not come in the way of a suitable and coordinated response between the parties concerned — the health ministry and the state governments. Centre should declare its support to all states and not make coronavirus outbreak a partisan issue. Cooperation between the Centre and the states fortunately continues at the official level in functional areas, and health is one such area where states have never withheld their cooperation. COVID-19 is potentially a national health disaster, and the states would expect help and assistance from the Centre in tackling this threat. The breakdown of dialogue between the Centre and the states, therefore, leads to the fear that when cooperation is really needed to ward off a collective danger, it may not be forthcoming. This is the case of the current threat posed by coronavirus, which threatens to spread across states. A virus does not recognise national boundaries, much less state boundaries. Testing facilities are unevenly distributed across states. The Centre should declare that it would extend all support, including financial, to all states and not make the coronavirus outbreak a partisan issue by excluding specific states or communities. Inter-state epidemic control is one area where there’s no politicisation. Everything is done professionally.
Dilemma of States under Indian federation
Health is a state subject under the Constitution. Consequently, Government of India's intervention in the fight against Covid-19 is unusual. The decision may have been prompted by the contagious nature of the virus. Hence the move to invoke the antiquated Epidemic Diseases Act, 1897, and declare Covid-19 a ‘national epidemic’. What has worried the states, however, is the use of the Disaster Management Act, 2005, to declare a national lockdown. This Act gives the Centre sweeping powers for administrative and financial control. And states are feeling the heat in the rules and regulations that have been framed for the lockdown. There is no wiggle room for states here. Kerala tried to announce its own set of relaxations in Covid-19-free zones, hoping to sow the first seeds of economic revival. The message from the Centre was clear. New Delhi will set the terms and conditions for an exit from the lockdown. States will have to obey the Centre’s diktats.
A bigger concern is the clash that’s brewing over the allocation of financial resources. The lockdown is bleeding exchequers of all states by depriving them of their biggest revenue earners, alcohol and petroleum products sales. The Centre has been particularly strict about banning alcohol. And since there’s only nominal vehicular movement, petrol sales have crashed. The loss of this revenue has impoverished the states. Tamil Nadu, for instance, nets almost Rs 30,000 crore every year from liquor sales. Punjab chief minister Amarinder Singh recently complained that he stands to lose Rs 6,000 crore because of the ban on alcohol.
Help each other, no politics please
Meanwhile, states have been ordered by the Centre to bear the full cost of sheltering and feeding members of the workforce who have not been able to go home. This is a burden most states are finding hard to carry. Maharashtra chief minister Uddhav Thackeray has already shot off a strong letter to Modi expressing his inability to take care of migrant workers in his state. As chief minister after chief minister — except, of course, those who belong to BJP — trains her or his guns at New Delhi for using the excuse of a national epidemic to restrict the administrative and financial powers of state governments, even as it expects them to tackle the health emergency on their own, the Centre is feeling the pressure to foot the cost of the lockdown bill. So far, it has been niggardly with money. It has allocated a mere Rs 15,000 crore for upgradation of health infrastructure in the states. This amount is to be spent over four years and divided between 28 states and eight Union territories. Hardly enough to set up even one fully equipped hospital. At the moment non-partisan approach of the Centre is essential to give broad guidelines for the management of the epidemic and the lockdown, arrange for finances to tackle the health and economic emergencies overwhelming the country, and keep the inter-state supply chain functional so that there are no shortages and economic activity doesn’t die completely.
There is absolutely no way coronavirus can be contained if the states do not work in tandem and in complete harmony with the central government. Currently, I don’t think that anyone is trying to minimise their responsibility. When an epidemic breaks out, everyone looks up to the central government to guide them with the steps that are required to be taken to prevent, control and contain the spread of the disease. This is a matter of life and death — no citizen is going to appreciate the politicisation of the coronavirus outbreak. India is well-organised at a national level when it comes to handling public health crises. During Epidemics, the need for a professional response surmounts other considerations, which includes politics. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
