|
|
|
|
|
|
Economic Highlights
Deadlock Over JPC:CONTEMPT OF PARLIAMENT, by Poonam I Kaushish, 11 September 2007 |
|
|
New Delhi, 11 September 2007
Deadlock Over JPC
CONTEMPT OF
PARLIAMENT
By Poonam I Kaushish
A tragic farce. This adage rang true the whole of last week
as one came face to face with a political pantomime so macabre and lurid that
it could put Lady Macbeth to shame. Wherein the UPA Government’s over-smartness
on the Indo-US nuclear deal seemed to have politically boomeranged. Leading to
the gravest ever assault on the
sovereignty of free India’s
Parliament and raising a big question mark on our parliamentary democracy
itself.
The acts and actors are many. The Prime Minister Manmohan
Singh tells the Left parties to take a hike on the nuclear deal. The Red
brigade sees red, picks up the gauntlet and threatens to withdraw its lifeline
from the UPA Government if it goes ahead with the deal. Faced with the spectre
of a mid-term poll, a shaken Congress placates the Left by setting up a joint committee
to look into the Left’s concerns and “take into account its findings before
operationalising the deal”. Importantly,
all this while Parliament is in session and actively seized of the matter. It
was listed twice for discussion and ‘mysteriously’ changed
A livid BJP-led NDA views this as an insult not only to the
Opposition but also to Parliament and its authority. The Leader of Opposition
LK Advani, demands a Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC), comprising
representatives of all leading parties, to go into the matter. Asserts he: “The
deal concerns India’s
national interest --- its foreign policy, strategic independence and
territorial integrity ---- and cannot be treated by the Government as a private
matter or a family affair.”
He clarifies: “The conventional position is that after the
Cabinet has approved a pact, nothing can be done. But by setting up a mechanism,
the Government has pre-empted a debate. If there has to be a mechanism, it has
to be a JPC.” Alleging it was a betrayal of Parliament, he also demanded that
the Constitution be amended to provide for mandatory Parliamentary approval of
international treaties impacting the nation’s sovereignty. His demand was
endorsed by the UNPA. With its pleas falling on deaf ears, the Opposition
stalled Parliament.
At one level, not a few would dismiss these outrageous
happenings as an exercise in political one-upmanship between the NDA and UPA.
The former drawing blood and the latter battling for political supremacy. At
another, and far more significantly, the fracas in both the Houses over the nuclear
deal has thrown up basic questions in regard to the quality and character of our
fledgling democracy and the sovereignty of Parliament representing the will of
the people.
The issue today is
not what happens to the nuclear deal. What matters is the unprecedented body
blow administered to Parliament and its sovereignty by the UPA Government. The
Opposition is correct on both counts. True, the Congress has every right to set
up any internal committee it chooses in tandem with any of its allies. But when
a Union Minister declares on behalf of the Union Cabinet that the findings of
the Congress-CPM panel would be “taken into account before operationalising the
deal”, it is clearly a case of the Government’s brazen and blatant attempt to
‘hoodwink’ Parliament and undermine its sovereignty.
Think. When Parliament is in session and a majority of the
MPs are opposed to the deal, as reflected in the walk-out the day the PM rose
to make his statement on the deal, the Government cannot set up a private deal
with one Party. That too with a Party which is supporting the UPA from the
outside and is not answerable to Parliament for its actions. Nor can the
Congress simply dismiss the matter as of “no consequence” to the Opposition or
Parliament. Neither can it fob it off by stating that international treaties do
not require Parliamentary approval.
Conveniently forgetting that in the past Parliament has
passed many resolutions on a variety of issues including foreign policy, which have
been binding on the Government. To now suggest that Parliamentary approval is
not necessary as the Union Cabinet has approved the deal, is wholly facetious. This
is akin to saying that Parliamentary resolution be damned and the Government,
enjoying a majority, can do as it pleases. Today it is the nuclear deal that is
poised to become a casualty of the Government’s authoritarian diktat. Tomorrow,
the Treasury Benches could jolly well scuttle Parliament and indeed, democracy
itself a la 1975.
A sad reflection, indeed, of the depth to which India’s
democracy has fallen. Transgressing
all limits of parliamentary morality. Not many seem to understand the
diabolical and dangerous dimensions of Parliament being bypassed. It needs to
be remembered that the temple of democracy is the bedrock of our nation State.
It represents the people of India,
who count upon it to function as the sovereign watchdog of their national
interest. Constitutionally, the Executive is responsible and accountable to
Parliament every second of the day. Its survival depends on its enjoying the
confidence of the Lok Sabha. Nothing more, nothing less.
Sadly, the basic purpose of adopting the Committee system in
1993 is still not understood even by those, including leaders, who should know
better. The system was consciously introduced to provide greater Parliamentary
control over the Government and also greater accountability to Parliament. Patterned
on the Westminster
model, it offers the MPs an opportunity to take a closer look at the working of
the Executive. It facilitates deeper consideration of the issues through
cross-examination of top officials, something not possible in the House.
Parliament as a whole has neither the time nor is it
equipped to take an intensive look at various policies and programmes. Margaret
Thatcher, as Britain’s
Leader of the Opposition demanded adoption of the committee system. Clear in
her mind that the growing volume and complexity of government could no longer
be scrutinized effectively by the old process of debate on the floor of the
House. What was worse, few Governments were willing to change even a coma in
the House as both face and prestige were involved. Importantly, she adopted the
committee system on becoming her country’s Prime Minister and thereby helped in
toning up the Government.
Few of today’s leaders care to understand that what makes
Parliament supreme in India’s constitutional framework is its unlimited power.
It can even amend Article 368, which lays down the power and the procedure for
amending the Constitution itself. Moreover, Parliament enjoys an inherent right
to conduct its affairs without interference from any outside body. It is the
sole judge of its own procedure. Even procedural lapses do not vitiate its
proceedings. Until a Bill becomes law, the legislative process not being complete, the Courts cannot interfere.
It is high time the Government came transparently clean on
the nuclear deal. It cannot do what it likes without engaging Parliament. Since
the UPA has taken umbrage against setting up a JPC, the NDA should have been
smart enough to get the existing Standing Committee on External Affairs, headed
by one of its MP, to demand a close look at the nuclear deal. This would have
been well within its scope. The UPA has to desist from reducing Parliament to a
farce, using its brute majority to rubber stamp its policies trumpeted through
ministerial fiats.
The UPA Government has adamantly maintained that the
UPA-Left panel is an “internal arrangement” and that it has “nothing to do with
Parliament.” Additionally, it has offered a separate talk’s mechanism to the
BJP leaders to break the stalemate. But two questions remain unanswered: (i)
What is the legal or constitutional status of the panels? None. It is only a
group of individuals, howsoever eminent. (ii) Can the panels summon the main
interlocutors, namely, the National Security Adviser, the Foreign Secretary or Kakodkar?
Not at all. Parliament’s Standing Committee or a JPC alone has the required
authority.
Remember, Parliament’s greatest strength and utility under
the Westminster model of democracy lies in its control over the Executive. Alas,
this has been progressively eroded over the past two decades. Bringing things
to such a pass that a party in power
today has no qualms in making major pronouncements on the eve of a session of Parliament
or even when Parliament is in session. Never mind that it goes against all
Parliamentary norms. Recall, both Houses of Parliament were locked up in the
middle of the Budget session last year arbitrarily, ignoring important pending
bills and hundreds of questions.
Parliament must be put back on the rails and its sovereignty
upheld. It is the Government’s inherent duty to preserve, protect and defend
India’s Parliamentary democracy and ensure smooth running of the Lok Sabha and
the Rajya Sabha. It is all very well for the UPA Government to serenade that
the Congress will not let down
Parliament and will pull it back from the brink. But it should remember two
things. Cushions do not make a bed! And, you cannot fool all the people all the
time. How long will we allow our leaders to play ducks and drakes with
Parliament and, indeed, with democracy itself. ---- INFA
(Copyright India News & Feature
Alliance)
|
|
Deadlock Over JPC:CONTEMPT OF PARLIAMENT, by Poonam I Kaushish, 11 September 2007 |
|
|
New Delhi, 11 September 2007
Deadlock Over JPC
CONTEMPT OF
PARLIAMENT
By Poonam I Kaushish
A tragic farce. This adage rang true the whole of last week
as one came face to face with a political pantomime so macabre and lurid that
it could put Lady Macbeth to shame. Wherein the UPA Government’s over-smartness
on the Indo-US nuclear deal seemed to have politically boomeranged. Leading to
the gravest ever assault on the
sovereignty of free India’s
Parliament and raising a big question mark on our parliamentary democracy
itself.
The acts and actors are many. The Prime Minister Manmohan
Singh tells the Left parties to take a hike on the nuclear deal. The Red
brigade sees red, picks up the gauntlet and threatens to withdraw its lifeline
from the UPA Government if it goes ahead with the deal. Faced with the spectre
of a mid-term poll, a shaken Congress placates the Left by setting up a joint committee
to look into the Left’s concerns and “take into account its findings before
operationalising the deal”. Importantly,
all this while Parliament is in session and actively seized of the matter. It
was listed twice for discussion and ‘mysteriously’ changed
A livid BJP-led NDA views this as an insult not only to the
Opposition but also to Parliament and its authority. The Leader of Opposition
LK Advani, demands a Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC), comprising
representatives of all leading parties, to go into the matter. Asserts he: “The
deal concerns India’s
national interest --- its foreign policy, strategic independence and
territorial integrity ---- and cannot be treated by the Government as a private
matter or a family affair.”
He clarifies: “The conventional position is that after the
Cabinet has approved a pact, nothing can be done. But by setting up a mechanism,
the Government has pre-empted a debate. If there has to be a mechanism, it has
to be a JPC.” Alleging it was a betrayal of Parliament, he also demanded that
the Constitution be amended to provide for mandatory Parliamentary approval of
international treaties impacting the nation’s sovereignty. His demand was
endorsed by the UNPA. With its pleas falling on deaf ears, the Opposition
stalled Parliament.
At one level, not a few would dismiss these outrageous
happenings as an exercise in political one-upmanship between the NDA and UPA.
The former drawing blood and the latter battling for political supremacy. At
another, and far more significantly, the fracas in both the Houses over the nuclear
deal has thrown up basic questions in regard to the quality and character of our
fledgling democracy and the sovereignty of Parliament representing the will of
the people.
The issue today is
not what happens to the nuclear deal. What matters is the unprecedented body
blow administered to Parliament and its sovereignty by the UPA Government. The
Opposition is correct on both counts. True, the Congress has every right to set
up any internal committee it chooses in tandem with any of its allies. But when
a Union Minister declares on behalf of the Union Cabinet that the findings of
the Congress-CPM panel would be “taken into account before operationalising the
deal”, it is clearly a case of the Government’s brazen and blatant attempt to
‘hoodwink’ Parliament and undermine its sovereignty.
Think. When Parliament is in session and a majority of the
MPs are opposed to the deal, as reflected in the walk-out the day the PM rose
to make his statement on the deal, the Government cannot set up a private deal
with one Party. That too with a Party which is supporting the UPA from the
outside and is not answerable to Parliament for its actions. Nor can the
Congress simply dismiss the matter as of “no consequence” to the Opposition or
Parliament. Neither can it fob it off by stating that international treaties do
not require Parliamentary approval.
Conveniently forgetting that in the past Parliament has
passed many resolutions on a variety of issues including foreign policy, which have
been binding on the Government. To now suggest that Parliamentary approval is
not necessary as the Union Cabinet has approved the deal, is wholly facetious. This
is akin to saying that Parliamentary resolution be damned and the Government,
enjoying a majority, can do as it pleases. Today it is the nuclear deal that is
poised to become a casualty of the Government’s authoritarian diktat. Tomorrow,
the Treasury Benches could jolly well scuttle Parliament and indeed, democracy
itself a la 1975.
A sad reflection, indeed, of the depth to which India’s
democracy has fallen. Transgressing
all limits of parliamentary morality. Not many seem to understand the
diabolical and dangerous dimensions of Parliament being bypassed. It needs to
be remembered that the temple of democracy is the bedrock of our nation State.
It represents the people of India,
who count upon it to function as the sovereign watchdog of their national
interest. Constitutionally, the Executive is responsible and accountable to
Parliament every second of the day. Its survival depends on its enjoying the
confidence of the Lok Sabha. Nothing more, nothing less.
Sadly, the basic purpose of adopting the Committee system in
1993 is still not understood even by those, including leaders, who should know
better. The system was consciously introduced to provide greater Parliamentary
control over the Government and also greater accountability to Parliament. Patterned
on the Westminster
model, it offers the MPs an opportunity to take a closer look at the working of
the Executive. It facilitates deeper consideration of the issues through
cross-examination of top officials, something not possible in the House.
Parliament as a whole has neither the time nor is it
equipped to take an intensive look at various policies and programmes. Margaret
Thatcher, as Britain’s
Leader of the Opposition demanded adoption of the committee system. Clear in
her mind that the growing volume and complexity of government could no longer
be scrutinized effectively by the old process of debate on the floor of the
House. What was worse, few Governments were willing to change even a coma in
the House as both face and prestige were involved. Importantly, she adopted the
committee system on becoming her country’s Prime Minister and thereby helped in
toning up the Government.
Few of today’s leaders care to understand that what makes
Parliament supreme in India’s constitutional framework is its unlimited power.
It can even amend Article 368, which lays down the power and the procedure for
amending the Constitution itself. Moreover, Parliament enjoys an inherent right
to conduct its affairs without interference from any outside body. It is the
sole judge of its own procedure. Even procedural lapses do not vitiate its
proceedings. Until a Bill becomes law, the legislative process not being complete, the Courts cannot interfere.
It is high time the Government came transparently clean on
the nuclear deal. It cannot do what it likes without engaging Parliament. Since
the UPA has taken umbrage against setting up a JPC, the NDA should have been
smart enough to get the existing Standing Committee on External Affairs, headed
by one of its MP, to demand a close look at the nuclear deal. This would have
been well within its scope. The UPA has to desist from reducing Parliament to a
farce, using its brute majority to rubber stamp its policies trumpeted through
ministerial fiats.
The UPA Government has adamantly maintained that the
UPA-Left panel is an “internal arrangement” and that it has “nothing to do with
Parliament.” Additionally, it has offered a separate talk’s mechanism to the
BJP leaders to break the stalemate. But two questions remain unanswered: (i)
What is the legal or constitutional status of the panels? None. It is only a
group of individuals, howsoever eminent. (ii) Can the panels summon the main
interlocutors, namely, the National Security Adviser, the Foreign Secretary or Kakodkar?
Not at all. Parliament’s Standing Committee or a JPC alone has the required
authority.
Remember, Parliament’s greatest strength and utility under
the Westminster model of democracy lies in its control over the Executive. Alas,
this has been progressively eroded over the past two decades. Bringing things
to such a pass that a party in power
today has no qualms in making major pronouncements on the eve of a session of Parliament
or even when Parliament is in session. Never mind that it goes against all
Parliamentary norms. Recall, both Houses of Parliament were locked up in the
middle of the Budget session last year arbitrarily, ignoring important pending
bills and hundreds of questions.
Parliament must be put back on the rails and its sovereignty
upheld. It is the Government’s inherent duty to preserve, protect and defend
India’s Parliamentary democracy and ensure smooth running of the Lok Sabha and
the Rajya Sabha. It is all very well for the UPA Government to serenade that
the Congress will not let down
Parliament and will pull it back from the brink. But it should remember two
things. Cushions do not make a bed! And, you cannot fool all the people all the
time. How long will we allow our leaders to play ducks and drakes with
Parliament and, indeed, with democracy itself. ---- INFA
(Copyright India News & Feature
Alliance)
|
|
Congress Slips On Volcker Slick:PARLIAMENT MUST SEEK TRUTH, by Poonam I Kaushish, 8 November 2005 |
|
|
New Delhi, 8 November 2005
Congress Slips On
Volcker Slick
PARLIAMENT MUST
SEEK TRUTH
By Poonam I Kaushish
Child is the father of man, wisely said renowned poet
Wordsworth. In the political lexicon, it translates into: Child is the downfall
of man! History, both ancient and modern, shows that many a father has fallen by
the wayside, thanks to the misdemeanors of their sons. Bollywood icon Amitabh
Bachchan rightly told his progeny in one movie Rishtey mein toh aap se chote hain, waseh apke baap lagte hain!
How else should one react to the unfolding saga of the UN
oil-for-food programme (OFFP) scandal which has suddenly engulfed the Congress
and the External Affairs Minister Natwar Singh in a burning inferno and singed
the UPA Government. Even though India’s
stake in the $1.82 b global scam is only a measly $63 m
True to style, the Government has gone into a denial mode
and hastily rubbished the report. On the ground that the facts mentioned in the
report were “insufficient” to arrive at any “adverse” conclusion. Forgetting
that only fools rush in where angels fear to tread. Would it not have been
better to first set up a probe, collate evidence and yell blue murder that they
had been unjustifiably implicated for all the wrong reasons, only after the
findings had given a clean chit to those accused. Imperialist designs, what
else?
Needless to say the Government finds itself on a sticky
wicket. For mainly four reasons. One, it cannot project the report as “partisan” and one designed to malign a
developing country as the Volcker Committee was set up by the UN Secretary
General Kofi Annan after the UN Security Council had endorsed the Resolution 1538
on 21 April 2004.
Two, the Committee sifted through over 12 million pages of
documents before making its report. In fact, Volcker himself struck an
unequivocal cautious note in the report’s preface that “the Committee emphasises
that the identification of a particular company’s contract as having been the
subject of an illicit payment does not mean that such a company --- as opposed
to an agent or a secondary purchaser with an interest in the transaction ----
made, authorized or knew about an illicit payment.” Besides, was the panel
prejudiced wholesale against international leaders and companies it named?
British Labour MP Gallaway, giants like Daimler Chrysler, and US, Russian and
French oil companies and banks.
Three, the three-member panel was constituted after careful
deliberations and much thought. Volcker is the former chairman of the US
Federal Reserve Board, Mark Pieth, a Swiss law professor specializing in
tracking transnational corruption, money laundering and organized crime and Justice
Richard Goldstone, a former judge of the South African Supreme Court and
prosecutor of the International Criminals Tribunal who reportedly made his
reputation by taking up cudgels against apartheid. Surely, he can’t be termed
as working against the interest of a developing country.
Four, as the Opposition has rightly pointed out, one cannot eagerly
solicit membership of the Security Council and yet indulge in UN bashing! Also,
one fails to understand what purpose a legal notice to the World body would
serve. Is the Congress hoping to whitewash its sins by detracting attention
from the main issue? Working on the premise this would be old hat by the time
another scandal surfaces, given India
short public memory.
Five, by promptly rubbishing the report without any
investigation we have shown that we still need to mature as a responsible democracy.
No other country has arbitrarily denied the charges. On the other hand Russia, Australia
and New Zealand
have already initiated inquiries. Even
the politicians named have so far advisedly chosen to remain quiet. Discretion,
after all, is the better part of valour.
Volcker, on his part, has minced no words to state that any
legal notice to him would not carry much weight as under the UN Charter, he
could enforce privilege not to say anything other than what is stated in his
report. Two, he has made it clear that
he had written to all those (alleged to have been) beneficiaries of the OFFP,
but received no response from a majority of the recipients. Three, the list of
beneficiaries was based on the records of Iraq’s Ministry of Oil, its State
Oil Marketing Organisation (SOMO) and The Iraq Bank. Four, till the scandal
broke, he was not even aware that Natwar Singh, mentioned among the 2500 - odd beneficiaries
is presently India’s
Foreign Minister!
For reasons best known to him Natwar Singh trashed the
report as a US-sponsored campaign against those who fought for Saddam and sees
it as a punishment for coming out in support of Iraq. Recall, it was on behest of the Congress that
the then BJP-led NDA Government had got the Lok Sabha to pass a unanimous
resolution “condemning” the US
invasion of Iraq
and standing by its beleaguered President.
It now appears that there was more to it than met the eye!
Clearly, this has compromised Natwar Singh’s ability to
handle effectively India’s most
important and crucial relationship with the US.
As matters stands, for the Capitol Hill anyone who figures in the Volcker
report is a strict “no no”. Even as the whirlpool of accusations gets murkier,
it is indeed strange that all have largely remained mum on the second “accused”–
the Congress Party.
Understandably, the Grand Dame of Indian politics too is
eager to deflect attention from its alleged misdeeds as it goes the whole hog
in playing a “hurt and injured” role as a bystander needlessly dragged into the
unseemly controversy. As the events continue
to unfold there is lot more to the Congress pretentious stance of innocence until
proven guilty than meets the eye. In
fact, the Congress “crime” seems to be more serious than that of Natwar Singh.
An individual is expendable, but not a party, especially one that led India to its freedom.
That spells not just bad news but a national tragedy.
At another level, the controversial saga has dented the
Congress party’s carefully crafted image of upholding the highest moral
standards. The coyer the party plays,
the bigger the spots get on Sonia’s spotlessly clean image. Post Bofors, this is the first major scam to
hit the party under the Gandhi Parivar.
Obfuscating it is not going to be easy.
All in all, the last word has still to be said on the issue.
Manmohan Singh has wisely decided to set up a committee to get to the “root of
the matter”. A panel which will hold a thorough and time-bound inquiry. The
Congress, too. should do the same. Natwar Singh needs to be complimented for announcing
that he would make a suo moto statement in Parliament on the matter, when it
convenes later this month. But that would not be enough. Singh’s statement and
the findings of the panel set up by the Government should be fully debated by
both Houses of Parliament.
The issue is not only about corruption in high places,
probity and morality but more important of people’s trust. The public is
entitled to know what happened. For the aam
aadmi to repose faith in democracy and its leaders, truth is vital. For the
country, the listing of India’s
historic Congress as a beneficiary is more damaging than the indictment of an
individual. The Congress needs to come clean, instead of confusing the issue.
It is a question of national honour and international prestige. Specially,
against the backdrop of our country being listed as one of the most corrupt
nations in the world. A strong message has to be sent that India and its
politicians are not for sale! There should be no scope for any doubt. -----
INFA
(Copyright India News and Feature Alliance)
|
|
Democracy At Stake:PARLIAMENT GETS TAINTED, by Poonam I Kaushish,3 May 2005 |
|
|
New Delhi, 3 May 2005
Democracy At Stake
PARLIAMENT GETS
TAINTED
By Poonam I Kaushish
Guess who said the following? “They are like animals. They are
disorganized, do not have any sense of etiquette, have double standards. They
are everything our parents and teachers don’t want us to be. It’s their
behaviour that makes India
look like a country of hooligans. So busy are they with their squabbles, where
do they get time to look at what’s bothering the common man. Is this how they
are supposed to behave?”
Yes, this is Generation X on our polity. The telling remark
says it all. A sad reflection, indeed, of the depth to which India’s
democracy has fallen. Transgressing all limits of political and public decency.
If proof was needed, the second half of the budget session of Parliament amply
provided it. For the second year in a row, the demand for grants of various Ministries
aggregating Rs 1,152,521 crore were passed without any debate in a disgraceful
record of barely five minutes last Wednesday. Thanks to the Opposition’s
boycott of both Houses (and all parliamentary committees) for three days last
week. Again for the second time.
A culmination of year-long bitter Parliamentary discourse,
walkouts, adjournments, even near fist-cuffs between the ruling UPA and the
BJP-led NDA opposition to “protest the Government’s behaviour with the
Opposition and the continuation of ‘tainted’ Railway Minister Laloo Yadav in
the Cabinet”. In a harsh three-page statement, the NDA accused the UPA of
adopting a “vindictive, confrontationist and hostile attitude.” It also charged
the Prime Minister Manmohan Singh with “practicing the worst kind of political
opportunism, brushing aside all moral principles, scruples and democratic
propriety.” Later bemoaned Leader of the Opposition Advani: “They treat us as
enemies.”
Amidst all this high “tainted” drama, the Prime Minister has
talked eloquently of the need for the country to evolve “new guidelines and new
standards” about “who should be a Minister and who is a tainted Minister.” Wise
words, indeed. But let us not be fooled. He virtually said the same thing in
his customary address to both Houses of Parliament at end of the first session
last year. He then spoke of a code of conduct for political parties to enable
Parliament to function smoothly and meaningfully. But none paid any heed. A
year down the line the phraseology alone has changed. Is a code really the
answer? Not at all. A basic code of conduct already exists for both Houses. But
no one follows it. In fact, only last month Rajya Sabha MP Karan Singh placed
on the table of the House, the latest Ethics Committee report, listing out fresh
do’s and don’ts for our Right Honourables.
Arguably, does one need guidelines for speaking the truth
and not telling lies? To condemn and shun criminalization of politics? To
denounce the use and abuse of money and muscle power? To shun the tainted? Not
induct corrupt ministers into the Cabinet, notwithstanding the much-touted Prime
Ministerial prerogative. No, a big no. Glib talk of new guidelines is merely a
cover up for inaction and sinful compromises. As the unbeatable proverb
succinctly asserts: If there is a will, there is a way.
Look it this way. We have adopted the Westminster model of Parliamentary democracy.
Britain
has no written Constitution, guidelines or code of conduct. Yet good, honest
governance and parliamentary propriety and probity are dictated by healthy and
time-tested conventions. The moment there is even a hint of a misdemeanor by a
Minister or MP he goes. None waits for a charge-sheet. Once Churchill’s War
Minister felt constrained to resign for accepting no more than a couple of
bottles of wine bottle!
Importantly, the Prime Minister has unfortunately ignored
that the issue of “tainted” Ministers is not of concern only to the BJP or the
NDA, as made out. It is an issue which gravely concerns every thinking Indian
as it exposes our moral and political bankruptcy. There is no shame, no guilt
and no remorse for legitimizing crime and corruption at the highest level. Sadly,
it is also playing merry hell with India’s image as a great, old
civilization and the world’s largest democracy.
The Prime Minister has explained away this shameless
compromise with basic values as the “compulsion of coalition politics.” Ostensibly,
the present Government cold not have been formed without Laloo Yadav and the
RJD MPs. So what? Should the formation of the Government take precedence over
what is morally correct? Would Parliament be strong if say Dawood or Telgi were
to be elected MPs? Would we accept the Prime Minister exercising his so-called
prerogative to induct Dawood into his Cabinet? Would we accept this as
“compulsion of coalition politics?” The heaven’s would not have fallen had the
Congress stood for its traditional and sacred moral values. At worst, it would
not have formed the Government, leading perhaps, to a Constitutional impasse and
even fresh elections.
Has the unprincipled and immoral pursuit of ends stirred
anyone’s conscience? Tragically “No”. All parties harbour criminals. Who can
ever forget the sight of an MP who was brought chained by the police to
Parliament House where his handcuffs were removed, so that he could attend the
House proceedings, and then put back for being taken to Tihar jail. Prior to that, he had to seek the Court’s
permission to attend Parliament.
As matters stands, there are over a dozen Right Honourables
in the present Parliament who have criminal cases pending against them in
various Courts. If this is the state of affairs in India’s high temple of
democracy can the States be far behind. Bihar tops the list, with Madhya
Pradesh, UP and Maharashtra close behind. A few years ago, a Bihar MLA,
allegedly under the influence of alcohol, threatened the Speaker with a sten
gun.
Over the years, the hold of criminals on the polity has
become stronger. Pick any newspaper or magazine. It has stories galore about
political misdemeanour and abuse of authority. At the last count, there were at
least 40 MPs and 700 MLAs who were allegedly facing criminal charges, including
theft, extortion, rape, dacoit and murder. These figures collated by the
Election Commission are, however, just a tip of the iceberg. The number of
politico-criminals roaming free at all levels is a lot more. Candidly,
political goons have emerged as the biggest threat to society and the nation.
Some of them (or their sons) even kidnap and rape, commit murder to cover their
tracks, threaten the police to suppress evidence and make a mockery of the law
and courts.
India’s great tragedy is that the very people charged with
the responsibility of protecting and preserving our democracy have become its
denigrators and destroyers. Wherein the rules of the game have changed
recklessly without a thought to the future and a premium placed on immorality.
The Lok Sabha Speaker Somnath Chatterjee laments the increasing criminalization
of politics in a lecture last week and pertinently asked: why are the political
parties not doing anything to remove this stigma. He also called on all
concerned to ensure that Parliament functioned smoothly as the most important
body representing the people.
Democracy and its institutions, such as Parliament, are no
doubt important. But the moot point is: Are institutions more important than the
nation and basic morality and probity in public life. Questionably, will recklessly
prolificacy and criminalization be allowed to become the bedrock of our
Parliamentary democracy? Ultimately, the
man behind the wheel matters as does his character and integrity. Remember, the
great importance placed by Babasaheb Ambedkar on the quality and probity of
India’s rulers. Said he: “A good Constitution in the hands of bad people
becomes a bad Constitution and a bad Constitution in the hands of good people becomes a good Constitution.”
Cleary if India’s democracy is to survive, we have to think beyond holding periodic
elections, putting a government in place and yelling from the roof tops that we
have a live, vibrant and kicking democracy. We have to draw a lakshman rekha and ask ourselves: are we
for a civilized form of democracy or are we for what President Giri aptly
called a “democracy” of fixers and scroundrels? Our rulers have been elected to
serve the people by honestly providing good governance and tackling issues of vital
concern to them. They are paid hefty salaries and enjoy innumerable freebies
and privileges. Yet there is no accountability. It is high time they face
recall if they failed to deliver, as advocated by Loknayak JP and supported by
the Speaker last week.
At the end the day, are we going to mortgage our conscience
to corrupt and tainted leaders? How long are we going to allow myopic partisan
politics to recklessly play havoc with India’s future? Democracy is not
competition in Constitutional indecency and impropriety. Enough is enough! ----INFA
(Copyright India News and Feature
Alliance)
.
|
|
Democracy At Stake:PARLIAMENT GETS TAINTED, by Poonam I Kaushish, 3 May 2005 |
|
|
New Delhi, 3 May 2005
Democracy At Stake
PARLIAMENT GETS
TAINTED
By Poonam I Kaushish
Guess who said the following? “They are like animals. They are
disorganized, do not have any sense of etiquette, have double standards. They
are everything our parents and teachers don’t want us to be. It’s their
behaviour that makes India
look like a country of hooligans. So busy are they with their squabbles, where
do they get time to look at what’s bothering the common man. Is this how they
are supposed to behave?”
Yes, this is Generation X on our polity. The telling remark
says it all. A sad reflection, indeed, of the depth to which India’s
democracy has fallen. Transgressing all limits of political and public decency.
If proof was needed, the second half of the budget session of Parliament amply
provided it. For the second year in a row, the demand for grants of various Ministries
aggregating Rs 1,152,521 crore were passed without any debate in a disgraceful
record of barely five minutes last Wednesday. Thanks to the Opposition’s
boycott of both Houses (and all parliamentary committees) for three days last
week. Again for the second time.
A culmination of year-long bitter Parliamentary discourse,
walkouts, adjournments, even near fist-cuffs between the ruling UPA and the
BJP-led NDA opposition to “protest the Government’s behaviour with the
Opposition and the continuation of ‘tainted’ Railway Minister Laloo Yadav in
the Cabinet”. In a harsh three-page statement, the NDA accused the UPA of
adopting a “vindictive, confrontationist and hostile attitude.” It also charged
the Prime Minister Manmohan Singh with “practicing the worst kind of political
opportunism, brushing aside all moral principles, scruples and democratic
propriety.” Later bemoaned Leader of the Opposition Advani: “They treat us as
enemies.”
Amidst all this high “tainted” drama, the Prime Minister has
talked eloquently of the need for the country to evolve “new guidelines and new
standards” about “who should be a Minister and who is a tainted Minister.” Wise
words, indeed. But let us not be fooled. He virtually said the same thing in
his customary address to both Houses of Parliament at end of the first session
last year. He then spoke of a code of conduct for political parties to enable
Parliament to function smoothly and meaningfully. But none paid any heed. A
year down the line the phraseology alone has changed. Is a code really the
answer? Not at all. A basic code of conduct already exists for both Houses. But
no one follows it. In fact, only last month Rajya Sabha MP Karan Singh placed
on the table of the House, the latest Ethics Committee report, listing out fresh
do’s and don’ts for our Right Honourables.
Arguably, does one need guidelines for speaking the truth
and not telling lies? To condemn and shun criminalization of politics? To
denounce the use and abuse of money and muscle power? To shun the tainted? Not
induct corrupt ministers into the Cabinet, notwithstanding the much-touted Prime
Ministerial prerogative. No, a big no. Glib talk of new guidelines is merely a
cover up for inaction and sinful compromises. As the unbeatable proverb
succinctly asserts: If there is a will, there is a way.
Look it this way. We have adopted the Westminster model of Parliamentary democracy.
Britain
has no written Constitution, guidelines or code of conduct. Yet good, honest
governance and parliamentary propriety and probity are dictated by healthy and
time-tested conventions. The moment there is even a hint of a misdemeanor by a
Minister or MP he goes. None waits for a charge-sheet. Once Churchill’s War
Minister felt constrained to resign for accepting no more than a couple of
bottles of wine bottle!
Importantly, the Prime Minister has unfortunately ignored
that the issue of “tainted” Ministers is not of concern only to the BJP or the
NDA, as made out. It is an issue which gravely concerns every thinking Indian
as it exposes our moral and political bankruptcy. There is no shame, no guilt
and no remorse for legitimizing crime and corruption at the highest level. Sadly,
it is also playing merry hell with India’s image as a great, old
civilization and the world’s largest democracy.
The Prime Minister has explained away this shameless
compromise with basic values as the “compulsion of coalition politics.” Ostensibly,
the present Government cold not have been formed without Laloo Yadav and the
RJD MPs. So what? Should the formation of the Government take precedence over
what is morally correct? Would Parliament be strong if say Dawood or Telgi were
to be elected MPs? Would we accept the Prime Minister exercising his so-called
prerogative to induct Dawood into his Cabinet? Would we accept this as
“compulsion of coalition politics?” The heaven’s would not have fallen had the
Congress stood for its traditional and sacred moral values. At worst, it would
not have formed the Government, leading perhaps, to a Constitutional impasse and
even fresh elections.
Has the unprincipled and immoral pursuit of ends stirred
anyone’s conscience? Tragically “No”. All parties harbour criminals. Who can
ever forget the sight of an MP who was brought chained by the police to
Parliament House where his handcuffs were removed, so that he could attend the
House proceedings, and then put back for being taken to Tihar jail. Prior to that, he had to seek the Court’s
permission to attend Parliament.
As matters stands, there are over a dozen Right Honourables
in the present Parliament who have criminal cases pending against them in
various Courts. If this is the state of affairs in India’s high temple of
democracy can the States be far behind. Bihar tops the list, with Madhya
Pradesh, UP and Maharashtra close behind. A few years ago, a Bihar MLA,
allegedly under the influence of alcohol, threatened the Speaker with a sten
gun.
Over the years, the hold of criminals on the polity has
become stronger. Pick any newspaper or magazine. It has stories galore about
political misdemeanour and abuse of authority. At the last count, there were at
least 40 MPs and 700 MLAs who were allegedly facing criminal charges, including
theft, extortion, rape, dacoit and murder. These figures collated by the
Election Commission are, however, just a tip of the iceberg. The number of
politico-criminals roaming free at all levels is a lot more. Candidly,
political goons have emerged as the biggest threat to society and the nation.
Some of them (or their sons) even kidnap and rape, commit murder to cover their
tracks, threaten the police to suppress evidence and make a mockery of the law
and courts.
India’s great tragedy is that the very people charged with
the responsibility of protecting and preserving our democracy have become its
denigrators and destroyers. Wherein the rules of the game have changed
recklessly without a thought to the future and a premium placed on immorality.
The Lok Sabha Speaker Somnath Chatterjee laments the increasing criminalization
of politics in a lecture last week and pertinently asked: why are the political
parties not doing anything to remove this stigma. He also called on all
concerned to ensure that Parliament functioned smoothly as the most important
body representing the people.
Democracy and its institutions, such as Parliament, are no
doubt important. But the moot point is: Are institutions more important than the
nation and basic morality and probity in public life. Questionably, will recklessly
prolificacy and criminalization be allowed to become the bedrock of our
Parliamentary democracy? Ultimately, the
man behind the wheel matters as does his character and integrity. Remember, the
great importance placed by Babasaheb Ambedkar on the quality and probity of
India’s rulers. Said he: “A good Constitution in the hands of bad people
becomes a bad Constitution and a bad Constitution in the hands of good people becomes a good Constitution.”
Cleary if India’s democracy is to survive, we have to think beyond holding periodic
elections, putting a government in place and yelling from the roof tops that we
have a live, vibrant and kicking democracy. We have to draw a lakshman rekha and ask ourselves: are we
for a civilized form of democracy or are we for what President Giri aptly
called a “democracy” of fixers and scroundrels? Our rulers have been elected to
serve the people by honestly providing good governance and tackling issues of vital
concern to them. They are paid hefty salaries and enjoy innumerable freebies
and privileges. Yet there is no accountability. It is high time they face
recall if they failed to deliver, as advocated by Loknayak JP and supported by
the Speaker last week.
At the end the day, are we going to mortgage our conscience
to corrupt and tainted leaders? How long are we going to allow myopic partisan
politics to recklessly play havoc with India’s future? Democracy is not
competition in Constitutional indecency and impropriety. Enough is enough! ----INFA
(Copyright India News and Feature
Alliance)
.
|
|
| | << Start < Previous 621 622 623 624 625 626 627 628 629 630 Next > End >>
| Results 5662 - 5670 of 5985 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|