Tunisia is an ancient country with a history that dates back to a thousand years before Jesus Christ. It is a “constitutional republic” with a President, a Prime Minister as head of government and a bicameral legislature. In 2009, it re-elected President Ali, who has been president since 1987, with nearly 90 per cent majority.
His government of 24 years was suddenly thrown out a week ago by a mob of protestors. There was a lot of resentment against the President and the fact that the economy was controlled and virtually owned by his family and its collaborators. Yet, Tunisia was considered to be safe; its fall was quite unexpected.
Can the same happen in India? People will laugh. India is accepted to be one of the most stable countries of the world, a model, in fact, for the entire Third World. People point out how India has in abundance the four factors which, Samuel Huntington had said, ensure stability – social plurality, separation of church and state, representative democracy and above all, the rule of law. That is accepted without reserve, or is it?
EROSION OF DEMOCRACY
India has a Constitution which, in the name of social justice, accords the powerful, and even multi-millionaires, from backward caste families special privileges in access to education, employment and even membership of legislatures and local bodies. Children of poor upper caste families not only have no privileges but actually suffer discrimination in all those respects. That is the social plurality we have.
India is accepted to be a truly secular state with separation of church and state. Is that correct? Hindu temples in many states of India are managed by the state. On the other hand, the institutions of a minority are subsidised by the state. A senior IAS official was bemoaning the fact that he had to transfer money every month to institutions of a minority community, drawn from the revenues earned by institutions of the majority community. That is the kind of separation of church and state — which orthodox leaders of the minority community do not support — that we have.
LEGISLATIVE IMMUNITY
Truly, India is a democratic state with democratic representation! Or, is it? The media has repeatedly pointed out that large numbers of legislators have serious criminal charges, including rape and murder, against them. Politics in India is big business. Politicians are known to control hundreds and even thousands of crores of rupees stashed mostly abroad. Such persons rule the country because most political parties in India are the private property of some family or the other; they have no internal democracy at all.
Leaders of the ruling party have explained how democratic their leader is: She listens to everyone and only then gives her judgement. It never occurs to them to enquire why the decision could not have been taken by a vote among the same members — who, incidentally, are all nominated.
There are some qualms about the extent to which the rule of law prevails in India. The essence of the rule of law is equality before law; the same law should apply to the poor as to the rich, to the weak as to the powerful. It is a fact that virtually no politician has ever been convicted of any offence, serious or minor. Apparently, the rich and the powerful enjoy special privileges. As the Jessica Lal case shows, their family members enjoy immunity, even when they commit murder in the presence of hundreds of persons.
INSTITUTIONAL AUTONOMY
Recent events are alarming enough to deserve serious comment. India has prospered so far because, whatever their differences, there was some mutual respect among the political parties. That respect seems to have vanished and been replaced by contempt. Political parties are brazenly opting for the immoral, as long as it can be given the fig leaf of legality. In fact, they look for the letter and not the spirit of the law. So, the powerful do whatever they desire.
Some weeks ago the government did take cognisance of the Adarsh scandal in Mumbai. Apparently, that was an aberration. It has flouted the spirit of the law and overruled the Leader of the Opposition in the matter of the appointment of the Central Vigilance Commissioner (CVC), going to the extent of defending him in the Supreme Court.
The conduct of the Commonwealth games was another scandal. The Government has dragged its feet and has not even filed a chargesheet, with the result that senior officials who were involved are out on bail. In the case of the 2G scam, it has actually launched an attack on the authority of the Comptroller and Auditor General who, as a Constitutional authority, is supposed to point out wrongdoings of the government.
It will not be a surprise if the government were to use the CVC precedent to subvert the judiciary and even the Chief Election Commission.
CHECK ON IMPROPRIETY
Unfortunately, the main Opposition too is besmirched in allowing the Karnataka Chief Minister to continue even after serious accusations of personal corruption — on the ground that it did not want to destabilise the only government it had in the South. Every game needs umpires. For the political game the judiciary are the umpires; and the CAG and the CVC are the linesmen. Even the police are the assistants to the referee. Players may appeal but should not question the decision of the referees.
The fundamental question is whether democracy in India can survive. It can, if the country is united. Unfortunately, recent trends indicate that India's politicians are not; they are disunited. Let us not forget, a thousand years ago, India was overrun by much smaller forces than ours because our rulers were disunited. Let us pray that at least our present-day rulers are wiser.
No comments:
Post a Comment