Party with a Difference is one with ‘Differences in the Party’
– Gummadi Prabhakar, Doctoral Fellow, University of Hyderabad
The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) was formed in 1980 with the slogan “Party with a Difference.” That means the BJP is different from the other parties. But it doesn’t look like that anymore. The slogan “Party with a Difference” has now become an outfit with ‘Differences in the Party’. The BJP’s stance on capital Amaravati is unclear. Its leaders keep talking about being true to one idea as a party. However, GVL, Srujana Chaudhary and BJP state president Kanna Laxminarayana are each taking a different stance. BJP’s decisions are usually decisive and do not brook any dissent. But in the case of Amravati, BJP’s stand points are pushing the people of Andhra into confusion. Such an attitude is quite different from that of the Bharatiya Janata Party. Putting aside the BJP’s stance on capital, let’s see what the law says.
Section 56, 94 (3) of the Andhra Pradesh Re-organization Act, 2014 clearly states that the construction of capital city of Andhra Pradesh is very much the responsibility of the Central Government. Arguing that the capital city issue is entirely a matter of state government and that the center has nothing to do with it is a very unfair argument. If the center has no connection with it, why had it given Rs.1500 crore to the state government? The Prime Minister had come and promised to help construct a capital city like Delhi. The Centre-appointed committee on Capital City presented its report to the Union Home Department. Why had the committee submitted such a comprehensive report to the center if was not associated? After Rajnath Singh’s thorough review of the report, funds were released for the construction. The President of India issued a gazette to set up the Andhra Pradesh High Court at Amaravati. The President would have not issued a Gazette to set up the High Court in Amaravati unless the Center recommends. If the Center is not involved in these matters, why did the Center leave the decision of the High Court to the State?
Speaking at a recent CII conference, Piyush Goyal said, a state in the South had cancelled electricity PPAs so that the country has become notorious internationally, governments should respect the commitments made in the past. In this case of flouting prior agreements, the Centre opined that it takes this seriously and an act of the legislation might be made to reduce devolution of funds for the states who resort to this. By the same logic, Why is the Center so sensitive about the PPAs and least bothered about Amaravati? About 130 central government institutions bought land in Amravati. A petition has been filed in the International Criminal Court of Justice on human rights violations in Amravati. Will the Center remain mute even on this?
