Giridhar Gamang, chief minister of Orissa-cum-Member of Parliament for Koraput in the late Lok Sabha needs to become a member of the Orissa legislature very soon, necessitating a by-election. Or else, so argued the Congress, the administration of the state would come to a dead halt. The Election Commission has, I am told, agreed to hold a by-election in June. What happened to the ongoing process of revising the electoral rolls, that heatwave, and all the other excuses that were being trotted out?

I am loath to describe this as favouritism, a charge I would not willingly see flung atthe gate of Nirvachan Sadan. But it is fair to describe this as thoughtless behaviour. The question will undoubtedly be asked: if Orissa cannot do without a properly qualified chief minister, is it any more bearable to have a ``caretaker'' administration ruling all of India for six months?

In all fairness, that is not a question which the Election Commission can answer by itself. The responsibility for the timing of the General Election lies with other entities as well, not excluding Rashtrapati Bhawan.

Let me take you back to December 4, 1997, the first occasion on which President KR Narayanan was forced to dissolve a Lok Sabha before it could complete its term. There was one crucial difference between 1997 and 1999. Eighteen months ago, Rashtrapati Bhawan didn't content itself with dissolving the eleventh Lok Sabha. That very day, it ordered the Election Commission to ensure that the next Lok Sabha be constituted no later than March 15, 1998. On April 26, 1999, by comparison, there was no mention ofdates.

Here is what Rashtrapati Bhawan said upon announcing the dissolution of the twelfth Lok Sabha: ``The official notifications in respect to the date for the constitution of the new Lok Sabha will, in accordance with the recommendations of the Election Commission, be published in due course.''

The same communique noted that ``the President reached the conclusion that the time had arrived for the democratic will of the people to be ascertained once again, so that a government can be formed which can confidently address the urgent needs of our people''. Mark those words ``the urgent needs.''

But they are not the only interesting facts to be noted. I would like to draw attention to two facts in particular.

First, it is now quite well-established that Rashstrapati Bhawan simply didn't even consider the possibility of elections down to April 25 at the earliest -- when Sonia Gandhi informed the President that she hadn't made much progress despite being given additional time to drum up support. TheElection Commission, again in stark contrast to 1997, wasn't even consulted. (A media report to the contrary was immediately denied by Election Commissioner Krishnamoorthy; the Chief Election Commissioner, then abroad, wasn't even called back.)

That is an unusual lapse; a General Election became a distinct possibility from the moment that Jayalalitha withdrew support from the Vajpayee ministry on April 14. It was careless, to put it mildly, for the President and his advisers to assume that Sonia Gandhi could conjure support for herself. (I do hope those advisers have been pulled up for lack of foresight).

The second point to be noted is that Rashtrapati Bhawan wasn't alone in being lulled into laziness; so too was the Election Commission. We have heard a lot about the great process of revising the electoral rolls. But did you know that the process began only on April 20 -- three days after the Vajpayee ministry was voted out?

Nor am I particularly convinced by the new-found fervour in some parties toenrol eighteen year olds. The only new voters to pass through the age-bar are those who celebrated their eighteenth birthdays by January 1999. If you turned eighteen any later, sorry, you are out of luck. In any given year, approximately two and half million Indians turn eighteen; holding polls in late autumn means anywhere between one and a half million to two million voters simply won't be on the rolls.

If anything, a June election would have been less unfair. Early polls would have meant lack of enfranchisement for only those eligibles who came of age between January and June. By September-October, several lakh more will be out of luck.

Revision of the rolls isn't the only excuse on offer. You can take your pick of a whole catalogue of natural disasters -- everything from heatwaves to the monsoons. Every party in the opposition will trot out its pet excuse to hide its lack of preparedness. And this is amazing -- because it is the behaviour of the opposition as a whole that is responsible for the wholemess.

As the Rashtrapati Bhawan communique makes abundantly clear, it was the failure of the opposition to unite that led the President to throw in the towel. Why did the opposition parties force the issue if they weren't prepared to face the people?

I recall Arjun Singh going on television soon after Jayalalitha withdrew support. The Prime Minister, he said, should resign immediately (presumably without Parliament entering the picture). Why is the Congress now prepared to let the same Prime Minister stay on in office for six more months?

Jayalalitha cited national security as one of her reasons to leave the BJP-led coalition -- a theme picked up by several other politicians. Have those pressing reasons suddenly become less important?

Amar Singh of the Samajwadi Party unwittingly came up with the best metaphor. Comparing a General Election to a war, he said it takes time for an army to gather its forces. True, but is there any excuse for commanders who launch an attack, and only then start gatheringtheir powder?

It is a sad commentary on the leaders of the opposition, on the Election Commission, and even Rashtrapati Bhawan that not one considered even the possibility of a General Election. In persons in their positions such lack of foresight is unfortunate.