<p class="bodytext">The Sarkaria Commission, which submitted its report in 1988, was anchored in the philosophy of cooperative federalism. Nearly four decades later, however, there is a growing chorus of complaints that instead of consolidating this spirit, India is sliding towards a regime of coercive centralism. This concern was articulated forcefully by Karnataka Chief Minister Siddaramaiah at the South Indian Socialist Conference recently. His warning about this “dangerous shift” goes beyond partisan rhetoric and raises serious constitutional questions about the balance of power. At the heart of Siddaramaiah’s critique is a convergence of concerns regarding the erosion of Centre-state consultation. A primary fear is “demographic punishment” through delimitation, which could diminish the political voice of the southern states despite their success in achieving population stabilisation. This is compounded by fiscal inequity; Karnataka receives barely 13 paise for every rupee it contributes in taxes, while the divisible pool is increasingly shrunk with the centre retaining cesses and surcharges. Siddaramaiah also argued that states are expected to deliver central schemes without adequate funds, flexibility, or prior consultation, violating both the federal and socialist spirit of the Constitution.</p>.<p class="bodytext">The ground-level impact of this lack of consultation is perhaps most visible in recent agricultural decisions. Unilateral central trade policies, such as permitting imports despite domestic surpluses, have repeatedly destabilised farm economies. Maize imports triggered procurement price crashes across producing states; duty-free pulse imports hurt growers during peak harvests; and cheap pepper imports have impacted farmers across the Western Ghats. Such decisions, taken without meaningful engagement with states, have left them scrambling to manage rural distress with limited fiscal tools.</p>.<p class="bodytext">The Sarkaria Commission, which anticipated these conflicts, made 247 recommendations, including setting up a permanent Inter-State Council headed by the Prime Minister, as a forum for dialogue and consultation. Although established in 1990, the Council has been steadily marginalised. Its last full meeting was held in July 2016, despite a mandate to meet at least three times a year. In the absence of this constitutional forum, disputes over policymaking and federal balance remain unresolved. Deepening these tensions is the confrontational role of governors in states with non-BJP governments, where Lok Bhavans are increasingly seen as sites of political obstruction rather than constitutional bridges. Cooperative federalism is not a slogan but a safety valve. It ensures that regional aspirations are negotiated within the constitutional framework rather than being overridden. Reviving institutions like the Inter-State Council and adopting a genuine ‘Team India’ approach, where the Centre facilitates rather than commands are essential to preserving the federal compact envisioned by the Constitution.</p>
<p class="bodytext">The Sarkaria Commission, which submitted its report in 1988, was anchored in the philosophy of cooperative federalism. Nearly four decades later, however, there is a growing chorus of complaints that instead of consolidating this spirit, India is sliding towards a regime of coercive centralism. This concern was articulated forcefully by Karnataka Chief Minister Siddaramaiah at the South Indian Socialist Conference recently. His warning about this “dangerous shift” goes beyond partisan rhetoric and raises serious constitutional questions about the balance of power. At the heart of Siddaramaiah’s critique is a convergence of concerns regarding the erosion of Centre-state consultation. A primary fear is “demographic punishment” through delimitation, which could diminish the political voice of the southern states despite their success in achieving population stabilisation. This is compounded by fiscal inequity; Karnataka receives barely 13 paise for every rupee it contributes in taxes, while the divisible pool is increasingly shrunk with the centre retaining cesses and surcharges. Siddaramaiah also argued that states are expected to deliver central schemes without adequate funds, flexibility, or prior consultation, violating both the federal and socialist spirit of the Constitution.</p>.<p class="bodytext">The ground-level impact of this lack of consultation is perhaps most visible in recent agricultural decisions. Unilateral central trade policies, such as permitting imports despite domestic surpluses, have repeatedly destabilised farm economies. Maize imports triggered procurement price crashes across producing states; duty-free pulse imports hurt growers during peak harvests; and cheap pepper imports have impacted farmers across the Western Ghats. Such decisions, taken without meaningful engagement with states, have left them scrambling to manage rural distress with limited fiscal tools.</p>.<p class="bodytext">The Sarkaria Commission, which anticipated these conflicts, made 247 recommendations, including setting up a permanent Inter-State Council headed by the Prime Minister, as a forum for dialogue and consultation. Although established in 1990, the Council has been steadily marginalised. Its last full meeting was held in July 2016, despite a mandate to meet at least three times a year. In the absence of this constitutional forum, disputes over policymaking and federal balance remain unresolved. Deepening these tensions is the confrontational role of governors in states with non-BJP governments, where Lok Bhavans are increasingly seen as sites of political obstruction rather than constitutional bridges. Cooperative federalism is not a slogan but a safety valve. It ensures that regional aspirations are negotiated within the constitutional framework rather than being overridden. Reviving institutions like the Inter-State Council and adopting a genuine ‘Team India’ approach, where the Centre facilitates rather than commands are essential to preserving the federal compact envisioned by the Constitution.</p>
