New Delhi
On India’s best and worst prime ministers till now, Vinay Sitapati, professor of law and politics at Shiv Nadar School of Law, Chennai, said, “It is a point of discussion whether one judges them according to the decisions they have made. Moreover, what mandate they have had while making those decisions. Did party control the parliament or did the parliament control the party? And now if you make judgement about Nehru, he had had soft landing.”
Talking about PM Narasimha Rao who had formed a minority government in 1991 with other parties, he said, “Narasimha Rao was not liked by many. Moreover, he was dependent on other parties as he had formed a minority government. He had inherited a lot of problems but he was able to take brave decisions. This is what Rao accomplished. I would say he was the best PM. He achieved so much with highest grades.”
He added that Manmohan Singh’s government was doing better on the economic front as his economic decisions gave the country much needed growth as earlier, India wasn’t doing good in economy. Asked about how Atal Bihari Vajpayee fared in governance, Sitapati said, “The BJP is a far more organised party. And it is not a party that encourages dissent.”
“I keep thinking about it but Rajiv Gandhi fits well as the worst PM. I believe Rajiv Gandhi was the worst as he had unquestioned authority over party and had a huge mandate in parliament, the highest one could get. He had enormous power on the scale of numbers. He did inherit India in a bad form. When it came to economy, he was well-equipped to make brave decisions. But then he got into minority appeasement.”
He added, “His potential was enormous, but he could not live up to it, maybe because he did not have much experience. His instincts were right. But he did not want to be a politician and he wasn’t made for it. A proper politician is one who from morning till evening is hungry thinking how to manipulate and how to keep things favouring him in every way possible.”