One of the most newsy places in the capital is Raisina Hill, the seat of the Union government. At any time of the day, newshounds can be found lying in wait as ministers, secretaries and other government functionaries enter or emerge from North and South Block. Until recently, the cameras were rarely directed towards the third major structure on the Hill: the Rashtrapati Bhavan. After all, there is little news value in reporting on the awards the President gave away or the dignitaries who called on him. No longer.
These days news emerges as much from Rashtrapati Bhavan as from other structures in Lutyens' Delhi. So much so that proper arrangements have now been made for interaction between the press and the increasing number of visitors calling on the President. But then, not every President has served in as turbulent political times as KR Narayanan. And few have established as firmly the President's constitutional role. Call it activism in the time of brittle coalition governments or India's experiment with democracy reaching maturity, Narayanan has ensured that the President is no longer taken for granted or is associated with a rubber stamp.
There is a view among politicians wary of Narayanan that he wouldn't have dared return the Cabinet's recommendations to invoke Article 356 of the Constitution if the government of the day had a clear majority in the Lok Sabha. But that assessment is unfair to the man and the times. True, there was a time when the Congress had a brute majority in the Lok Sabha, and had a decisive say in who moved into Rashtrapati Bhavan and how he functioned. But Narayanan is not a Fakhruddin Ali Ahmed who unthinkingly signed papers sent by Indira Gandhi to impose the Emergency and reportedly took sleeping pills later.
It is a safe bet that Narayanan's approach would have been no different if the Congress or the BJP were to enjoy a clear majority. Narayanan has been in Rashtrapati Bhavan for just over a year, and the message is clear: anybody who takes him for granted or wishes him to be a rubber-stamp does so at his risk and peril.
By returning two recommendations by cabinets headed by I K Gujral and A B Vajpayee, Narayanan may have proved to be a master of balance, but has forced governors and officials to go the extra mile in building up a strong case to dismiss a state government. Going by his high standards of adhering to the Constitution, it is doubtful if most of the 100-odd occasions when Article 356 was invoked in the past would have met his approval. There have been many instances of non-Congress governments being dismissed on the flimsiest of grounds; sometimes the governor's report recommending dismissal was even prepared in Delhi and faxed to him in the state capital for return transmission to Delhi after appending his signature! Today, the Congress _- in the remote possibility of finding itself in power on its own _ would find it well-nigh impossible to act likewise, thanks to the detailed exposition of Article 356 by the courts, the Sarkaria Commission, the deliberations at the Inter-State Council and, above all, the hitherto unknown factor of a working President.
So is Narayanan something of a superman with qualities that no other past President had? The answer perhaps lies in the times we are living in; times marked by an erosion of political values, the death of ideology, idealism and even ideas. The executive is sluggish, so is the legislature, while the judiciary enters areas that were hitherto the domain of the executive. In times of earlier certainties and entrenched political interests, any deviation or dalliance would have been unthinkable, even less implemented. Now that the practice of flouting norms has been virtually institutionalised, Narayanan's efforts to go by the rule book stand out in sharp relief. The difference between him and his predecessors lies in the difference in the times in which they served.
Narayanan appears to thrive on these times of political uncertainty. In terms of scholarship, dignity and wisdom associated with the high office, Narayanan matches the best. Perhaps some predecessors had better presidential mettle, but none succeeded in elevating the office and making it a live instrument in the politics of the day as Narayanan has. He has made Rashtrapati Bhavan an active, impartial and ruthless protector of constitutional and democratic norms, and it can no longer be viewed as an adjunct of the party in power. Zail Singh held out the promise of being different when Rajiv Gandhi was in power, but that remained a promise. As Narayanan said in the interview on August 15: "My image of the President is of a working President who has a subtle influence on the executive and other arms of the government and on the public as a whole...I don't think that we can rest on our oars in the maintenance of democracy...It is a matter of the deepest regret that a great cynicism prevails in the public mind about politics and administration."
During his recent visit to Europe, Narayanan worked more like the country's chief executive or even the finance minister, selling India to prospective investors, and allaying fears on India's nuclear designs. Old-timers recall that presidential visits abroad are normally laid-back engagements, banquets and gathering of NRIs with sight-seeing trips thrown in. This time Narayanan was at work.
The ups and downs in the life of 77-year-old KR Narayanan are well known. His aides in the foreign service say they would have been surprised if he had not acted the way he has on political issues. His sweet and dull personality makes him politically acceptable, but as Gujral and Vajpayee have realised, there is nothing sweet or dull in his discharge of presidential duties. A Union minister says he is too proper and effective; worse, he has not shown any biases despite his known Left leanings. All in all, Narayanan's tenancy of Rashtrapati Bhavan may actually turn out to be the most memorable _- and newsiest _- of them all.
