The false hierarchy between Chief Ministers and the Prime Minister

Self-serving is best done when others are paying for it. For long, political deities of Union and state governments of the Indian Union have indulged in obscene self-promotion using public funds under the guise of public advertisements. On May 13, Supreme Court banned the use of photographs of political personalities, including Chief Ministers, in any government advertisement funded by public money. The Supreme Court situated in New Delhi, has exempted three positions, including the Prime Minister. The exempted positions are manned by individuals who are residents of New Delhi during their job-tenure.

Of the ‘exceptional’ positions, the Prime Minister's is the most overtly political. How photographs of CMs promote ‘personality cult’ but those of PM don't, is best known to the judges. But this discriminatory gradation between the position of CM and PM was challenged by multiple-times CM of Tamil Nadu M Karunanidhi. This present-day federalist and previously a votary of secession from the Indian Union (before the democratic republic outlawed certain kinds of aspirations from being expressed democratically) correctly reminded us that under the Constitution’s federal structure, CM and PM have equal status. 'Chief' and 'Prime' mean the same.

Analogies like PM being family-head/elder brother and CM being children/younger brother aren't only false, but deliberately mischievous. They engineer popular consent for a discriminatory concept that has no place even in the highly-centralised Indian Union Constitution. This false hierarchy between PM and CM is entirely made-up, like the myth of Hindi being the ‘national’ language ( Its not. It's an official language like many others. There’s no ‘national’ language in the Indian Union. Gujarat High Court has ruled that for public notices in Gujarat, Hindi is a foreign language). CM and PM are more like departmental heads of a multi-department institution, where departments have differing functions. 

If anything, state governments are more relevant to people’s everyday lives than the Union government at New Delhi. The present government’s slogan of ‘cooperative federalism’ must be taken forward to start a constitutional process by which states can take back powers that have slowly been grabbed by New Delhi from the states, ever since the transfer of power from London to New Delhi. In fact, similar to the American system, it may not be a bad idea to introduce state supreme courts as the final court of appeal on matters and subjects on which states and not New Delhi have jurisdiction.

But why only target photographs? Names on foundation stones and inauguration plaques represent the same perverse mentality that seeks short term fame and long-term immortality using public funds. Apart from characters (and their lackeys) whose photos and names adorn pages, billboards and stones, support for such things come from the same mindset that lauds the British for ‘building’ the railways -- never mind that they were built to transfer troops to quell non-Gandhian type rebellions and loot materials out of the hinterlands to ports. And of course, brown people’s sweat and blood built it and paid for it.

Some have argued that such pictures add ‘legitimacy’ to a public message. But isn’t that purpose serve by the ever-present Ashok Stambha -- the four lions that brown people have been taught to publicly heed and respect, unless they want to receive ‘special’ treatment from the government. The New Delhi satraps who ride the beasts during their long or short rule, know only too well that the East India Company and the British monarchs also represented themselves in the subcontinent through decorated lions, on seals and passports. The pose of the beasts has changed, their numbers have increased. The species remains the same.

The author comments on politics and culture @gargac