West Bengal earlier had a bicameral legislature established in 1952 by then Bidhan Chandra Roy led Congress government. It was during Ajoy Mukherjee-led United Front government, a coalition of Bangla Congress, CPI(M), CPI and other Left parties, that the state decided to abolish the bicameral legislature in 1969 — the decision was approved by the Parliament. Later, Punjab too followed West Bengal.

The debate about the necessity of a bicameral system in a state isn’t limited to West Bengal. Already this year, Jaganmohan Reddy-led YSR Congress government passed the resolution in the state assembly to abolish the Legislative Council — presently dominated by the opposition Telugu Desam Party of former chief minister Chandrababu Naidu. In Tamil Nadu, the revival of the council has been an important issue for the DMK. In 1986, MG Ramachandran-led AIADMK government successfully passed the resolution to abolish the bicameral system in the state assembly — and later the two houses of the parliament too approved it.

Since then, this issue has been a bone of contention between the two Dravidian parties. Later, the DMK governments under Karunanidhi had made several unsuccessful attempts to revive the council by passing resolutions in the state assembly but the subsequent AIADMK governments under Jayalalithaa altered those resolutions and passed counter resolutions in the state assemblies. With DMK coming back to power, it is expected that MK Stalin-led state government will once again try to revive the council — a poll promise which didn’t miss the party's manifesto this time too.

Is a bicameral legislature system crucial for the states? Presently, only six states — Andhra Pradesh, Telangana, Karnataka, Bihar, Uttar Pradesh and Maharashtra — have the bicameral legislature system. Although the Legislative Council, the upper house at the state level, is similar to the line of Rajya Sabha, the upper house at the centre level, there are differences. The Legislative Council practically has no say in legislating laws of the state, unlike the Rajya Sabha, where the bills — barring the money bill — passed by the Lok Sabha have to be passed.

Basically, a Legislative Council is a toothless house with no powers, unlike the Rajya Sabha. Significantly, the Indian Constitution leaves the decision to have a council optional. The council has been often said to be a burden on the state's exchequer. What’s the need for having such a council at the cost of taxpayer’s money?

The supporters of the council argue that its existence is beneficial for the proper functioning of the democracy in a state. They say, with the creation of a Legislative Council, many intellectuals, who aren’t eager to take part in the state assembly election battles, may be nominated to the upper house. They say the council will play a crucial role by keeping a check on the bills often hurriedly passed by the state assembly.

These arguments in favor of the council are hollow. It’s an open secret that the Legislative Council often acts as a place for the rehabilitation of the uncontested or defeated leaders and disgruntled leaders of the ruling party. Also, the state ruling party-aligned “intellectuals” are nominated in the council. The argument that the council keeps checks and balances is also misplaced because it has no power to block any bill passed by the state assembly.

Coming to West Bengal, since the assumption of power, Mamata herself has always blamed the previous 34 years old CPI(M) led Left Front for leaving a huge debt burden. Although during her ten years in power, the Trinamool Congress government already has surpassed the debt of the previous Left government. In fact, the debt has almost doubled under Mamata’s tenure. At a time when the state itself is burdened by huge debt, it’s really surprising that the Mamata Banerjee government is willing to create a council, which itself is an extra burden on the state's treasury.

The Trinamool leaders are also arguing for the council to improve the health of democracy in the state. As far as the democracy of the state is concerned, the less said the better. Already, there have been reports of post-poll violence across the state carried by goons aligned to ruling Trinamool on voters and supporters of BJP, CPI(M), Indian Secular Front (ISF) and other opposition parties. This isn’t taking place for the first time. The violence-ridden 2013 and 2018 Panchayat elections and 2015 Municipal elections, where many voters couldn’t even properly practice their voting rights, showed how democracy has weakened under Mamata’s tenure.BJP certainly played a role in the latest post-poll violence but what about the earlier ones when BJP’s role was limited?

Actually, the purpose to create the council is to rehabilitate the defeated and disgruntled leaders of the ruling party, apart from nominating party-aligned “intellectuals” — who in the name of having rational-critical debates will be happier to praise the ruling government, the ruling party and the chief minister. The state would mostly gain nothing — except an extra toothless legislative house, which rather will be a burden on taxpayer’s money. Instead of focusing on creating the Legislative Council, a useless priority, it would be better for the Trinamool government to correct its mistakes — if it is really serious to improve the health of democracy under its tenure in West Bengal. (IPA Service)