|
|
|
|
|
|
Political Diary
Putin Wins 5th Term: INDIA & WORLD REACT By Prof. (Dr.) D.K. Giri, 22 March 2024 |
|
|
Round The World
New
Delhi, 22 March 2024
Putin Wins 5thTerm
INDIA & WORLD REACT
By Prof. (Dr.) D.K. Giri
(Secretary General, Assn for Democratic Socialism)
The
landslide victory of Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin in the presidential elections
last Sunday with a historic margin has elicited reactions from across the
world. It appears from the comments by world leaders that Russia’s break with the
West and tilt towards China is almost complete. In the current geo-political
order divided between the West and Russia-China axis, India is trying to remain
non-aligned or in the new parlance, New Delhi is attempting multi-alignment. India
says it will maintain the decades-long strategic ties with Russia whereas, at
the same time, Prime Minister Modi has made new defence link with the United
States and the European countries.
The
fifth consecutive victory of Putin which will keep him as President till 2030
will maintain the current world order marked by antagonism between Sino-Russian
alliance and the Western powers led by USA, and the continuing deaths and
devastation in Ukrainian war. Putin will continue the war with Ukraine and
deepen the contacts with China.
Out of
about 140 million people and 114 million voters, 74.22 per cent voted in the
elections. The nationwide turnout was about 7 per cent higher than the last
elections in 2018 which was 67.5 per cent. Putin got 87.8 per cent of the total
votes which is the highest ever in post-Soviet electoral history. His opponent,
the Communist candidate, Nikolai Kharitanov secured just 4 per cent of the
votes. This is by far the biggest victory any President has had. This will also
enable Putin to overtake Stalin’s term in office for 30 years. Former KGB
agent, Putin has been in office continuously since 1999 as Prime Minister or
President.
As said
before, reactions are clearly divided between Putin’s critics and his allies
and friends. The critics contend that elections were not fair or free.
Substantial candidates did not have a chance to contest. The Election
Commission of Russia did not give the clearance to candidates. For instance,
BozisNadhezdin, an anti-war candidate was barred from running in the elections.
International observers pointed out ballot stuffing and fraudulent counting.
Elections in Russia have just been a ritual.
Many Russian
Missions faced protests against the polls. In Germany, these were led by
YuliaNavalnaya – the wife of late critic of Putin, Alexi Navalny. They were
complaining against mass censorship, persecution of genuine opposition leaders
to Putin’s regime and manipulation of the electoral machinery. World leaders condemned
the polling held in Russian-occupied Ukraine territories annexed during the
war. The Ukraine President called it a crime to hold elections in their
territory.
Let us
scan the reactions; first, those which were congratulatory and supportive.
Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi wrote in X, “Warm congratulations to HE Mr
Vladimir Putin on his election as the President of the Russian Federation. Look
forward to working together to further strengthen the time-tested special and
privileged strategic partnership between India and Russia in the years to come.”Likewise,
Chinese President Xi Jinping said that Beijing would maintain close
communication with Moscow to promote the ‘no limits’ partnership they agreed in
2022 just before Russia invaded Ukraine. He added, “I believe that under your
leadership, Russia will certainly be able to achieve greater achievements in
national development and construction”. Recall that India-China-Russia are in
BRICS which challenges US domination of the global economy.
Saudi
Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman offered his congratulation on Putin’s decisive
victory. Kremlin said that the two leaders expressed their readiness on
telephone to pursue their ‘effective coordination’ in the OPEC Plus
oil-producing group. The Iranian President EbrahimRaisi, accused by the West of
supplying weapons to Russia, also congratulated Putin. North Korean leader Kim
Jong Un who is also accused of sneaking arms to Russia wished Putin on his
victory. North Korea is said to have shipped 7000 containers of arms to Russia.
This was the accusation by South Korea’s Defence Minister, who said that the
transfer of arms from North Korea began since last July.
The
reactions from Africa came from four countries in the Sahel region – Burkina
Faso, Mali, Niger and Chad. These countries strengthened their ties with Russia
following the coups last year at the cost of their former allies France and the
US. A Burkina Faso daily Aujourd’ hui au fasosaid, “In Africa, the
Russian elections could sound like a non-event. But given the context in Sahel,
it takes on a particular meaning, because Putin embodies the new geo-political
balance of power on the Continent with growing (Russian) presence and influence”.
The
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy in a strongly worded message said,
“Russian election has no legitimacy. It is clear to everyone in the world that
this person (Putin), like many others throughout history, has become sick for power
and will stop at nothing to rule for forever”.
The US
President Joe Biden had not commented so far. But the White House Spokesperson
Vedant Patel on Sunday said, “Russian election was obviously not free, nor
fair”. Citing repression of the opposition and media he said, “Putin is likely
to remain the President of Russia, but that does not excuse him of his
autocracy”. David Cameron, the former British Prime Minister and the current
Foreign Minister decried the Russian elections which, “starkly underline the
depth of repression under President Putin’s regime which seeks to silence any
opposition to his illegal war”.
The
European Union Foreign Ministers met in Brussels on Monday to formulate their
reactions to the war. They made strong statements but did not heed the request
of Navalny’s widow not to recognise Putin’s new government. They, however,
decided to impose sanctions on individuals linked with the mistreatment and
death of the Kremlin critic Alexi Navalny. The German Foreign Minister said, “Vote
was without choice, demonstrated Putin’s heinous behaviour against his own
people”. France Foreign Minister cited increasing repression of civil societies
and all forms of opposition to the regime. He hailed the courage of Russians
who demonstrated against the election conditions. At the time of writing, 74
Russians were arrested for this. The EU foreign policy chief Josph Borrell said
that the vote was based on repression and intimidation.
The
contrasting reactions from global leaders actually exposed the geo-political
divide that has widened since the Ukrainian war that began two years ago. This
has undoubtedly triggered the deepest crisis in power relations since the Cold
War. India’s position on Russia vis-à-vis the Ukrainian war is by now
well-known and somewhat grudgingly acknowledged by the Western powers. Yet, New
Delhi has neither effectively bridged the gap between Russia and the West, nor did
it offer to mediate between Russia and Ukraine. Even Turkish President Erdogan
while congratulating Putin has offered to facilitate a rapprochement between
Russia and Ukraine.
Foreign
Minister Jaishankar has pointed out more than once that the West is pushing
Russia to China, and may I add India to Russia. If the West took a hard line on
revanchist and expansionist China, it would have been easier for India to
persuade Moscow to distance from Beijing and accommodate the West. The
challenge for diplomacy both for India and the West continues. The West must
make a choice between China and Russia, whereas India tries to bring Russia
closer to the West. ---INFA
(Copyright, India News &
Feature Alliance)
|
|
Claims and Poll Prospects, By Inder Jit, 21 March 2024 |
|
|
REWIND
New Delhi, 21
March 2024
Claims
and Poll Prospects
By Inder Jit
(Released on 25
September 1979)
Predictably if prematurely, the poll guessing game is
on again. Anyone who even looks like having some clue about the popular mood
and the possible outcome of the forthcoming general election is in demand. So
also are the astrologers who are better placed than most others they have at
least Bhrigu Samhita and the stars to go by not only those in seats of authority
and their cohorts, but hundreds of others all over the country are busy getting
them to peer into the future. Those anxious to retain power of aspiring to
membership of Parliament want help to determine their prospects and tactics. Celestial
guidance is also sought by scores of captains of industry and others to decide
on the political horses they should profitably back and the best way in which
they should hedge their bets. Seasoned politicians and observers alone prefer
not to commit themselves and speak in parables or in general terms. Candidly, a
discussion in terms of numbers is unduly early. The situation is still largely fluid
notwithstanding loud, rival blasts.
Anything can happen between now and the New Year; the
poll, according to latest indications, is still likely to be held on or about
December 30. This will depend upon a combination of several factors: the
prevailing circumstances at the time and the ability of the rival parties
effectively to pose vital issues at stake before the people and to shake them
out of their tragic indifference to their own long-term interest and that of
their children. The situation has already changed greatly since August 22 when
the President, Mr Sanjiva Reddy, dissolved the Lok Sabha unexpectedly. The
Janata Party and its leaders found themselves down in the dumps that day.
Within 48 hours, however, they were smiling again when Mr Morarji Desai and
others addressed a “protest meeting” at the Ramlila grounds. Even the most
optimistic among the Janata leaders were taken by surprise. Over a lakh of
persons turned up at short notice in sharp contrast to the attendance at two
earlier meetings, one convened by Janata (S) and the other by Congress (I).
Happily for the Janata leaders, their party prospects
appear to have improved over the past month. On August 26, a top Janata leader
told me: “Bombay’s welcome to Morarjibhai has been even better than the turnout
in New Delhi. We should be able to get as many seats as we held in the
dissolved Lok Sabha: about 200.” On Thursday, September 20, Mr Chandra Shekhar
told me: “We will win at least 225 seats. We may well bag 300 if the present
trend continues.” The Janata chief feels particularly confident on three
grounds. First, popular response. “The crowds everywhere”, he says, “are twice
those of 1977 and as enthusiastic.” Second, the people’s anger against the
Janata is now turning against Janata (S). Few are willing to buy Mr Charan
Singh’s “alibis” for the spurt in prices. Third, the people’s continuing
abhorrence of authoritarianism. Asserts Mr Chandra Shekhar: “The 1977 vote was
not negative. Our people voted positively for freedom and democracy.”
If Mr Chandra Shekhar is confident, Mrs Indira Gandhi,
Mr Charan Singh and their respective confidants are no less optimistic. A
senior Congress (I) leader told me: “Make no mistake, we are winning. Mrs
Gandhi alone can give the country a strong and stable government. Our rock
bottom is 240 seats. But we are hoping to win 350 seats.” He then explained: “We
drew a virtual blank in the north in 1977. This time we expect to win here at
least a hundred seats, giving us a minimum of 250 seats all over the country.”
(Mrs Gandhi won 150 seats in 1977.) Top Janata (S) leaders dismiss the Janata
and Congress (I) claims as “wishful thinking” and maintain: “Our Alliance alone
will triumph. We will get at least 250 seats and may even go up to 325 seats.
Each of our allies is going to concentrate in its respective stronghold. No, we
shall not fritter away our energies. Chaudhury Sahib will concentrate in the
north, Mr Urs and MGR in the south, Mr Chavan and Mr Pawar in the west and the
CPM in the east.”
All these are essentially claims and counter-claims. Much will eventually depend upon certain vital factors and
indicators -- the nature of the contests, straight, or multi-corner, and the
attitude of the Harijans and the minorities who have played a crucial role in
the poll outcome over the past three decades and more. The caste Hindus and
the backward classes have, no doubt, constituted a majority among the
electorate all along. But they have invariably reduced themselves to the
position of a hopeless minority (and to
nonce) by the unthinking manner in which they have exercised their
franchise. Experience has shown that of every hundred Muslim voters, for
instance, eighty or so make it a point to poll. What is more, all of them have
generally voted for one common candidate. In sharp contrast, barely forty out
of a hundred caste Hindus have normally cared to vote and, what is equally
significant, they have invariably voted for ten or more candidates, if not for
as many!
Not many remember certain basic features of India’s
electoral landscape. Until the 1977 poll, the Congress virtually enjoyed the
full or “captive” support of the Harijans and the minorities. This enabled the
party to win electoral battles again and again. Some veteran observers place
this support at about 25 per cent of the votes polled. The Congress thus
required only a fraction of the remaining vote to win huge majorities; in 1971,
it required merely an additional 18 per cent of the caste Hindu votes to win a
massive majority of 352 of the 524 seats in the Lok Sabha on a minority mandate
of 43 per cent --- 25 per cent plus 18 per cent. But the situation underwent a
radical change in 1977, as a result of the Emergency and its many authoritarian
excesses. The Muslims largely decided to oppose Mrs Gandhi and a sizable chunk
of the Harijan vote also went against the Congress. The net result? The
Congress Party got knocked for a six in the north and won seats only in the
south.
Mrs Gandhi is well aware of the powerful support her
party has received from the Harijans and the minorities. Indeed, it was this
support as symbolised by Mr Jagjivan Ram and Mr Fakhruddin Ali Ahmed which
enabled her to win her grim battle against the Syndicate in 1969 as also the
poll of 1971. (Her first salvo against the Syndicate at the time of the great
split, it may be recalled, was the joint letter Jagjivan Ram and Mr. Ahmed wrote
to the then Congress President, Mr Nijalingappa, accusing him of “communalism”
and of joining hands with the Jana Sangh!) Mrs Gandhi desperately tried to
prevent any erosion in the support of the Harijans and the minorities in 1977.
She clarified that Government action in regard to Harijans welfare had nothing
to do with Mr Jagjivan Ram personally. She also repeatedly projected the Janata
as a party dominated by Jana Sangh and the RSS. But all these efforts proved of
little avail.
Much of what has been happening over the past few weeks
is largely a part of the self-same exercise by the leading political parties:
wooing the Muslim and Harijan voters by all means fair or soul and ensuring for
themselves “some minimum committed support.” The Janata Party’s decision to go to
the poll battle under the leadership of Mr Jagjivan Ram and to hold out to the
Harijan voters the promise of giving them India’s first Harijan Prime Minister
has created a major problem for both the Congress(I) end the Janata(S). More
and more Harijans now appear inclined tο swing their support in favour of the
Janata Party much to the chagrin of Mrs Gandhi. Efforts are consequently on to
achieve one of two things: either get Babuji, as Mr Jagjivan Ram is popularly
known, to somehow cross over to their side or to erode his credibility vis a
vis the Harijan masses. Witness the occasional rumour that Babuji is about to
join hands with Mrs Gandhi.
Ultimately, one
thing alone is clear. There is little scope for going by the old and familiar indicators
or by generalisations. The Muslims and the Harijans might have voted en bloc in
the past. But neither can be taken for granted any more. Both communities today
increasingly understand their abiding interest and are not going to be taken in
by gimmickry. Likewise, the caste Hindus splintered
their votes all these years. But they may not necessarily do so this time.
(Lately, more and more people have been heard to say: “Is it a crime to be a
Hindu?”) Again, Mrs Gandhi may appear to be riding a new wave of popularity.
But there are still three months to go. The time for hard decisions is yet to
come. --INFA.
(Copyright, India
News & Feature Alliance)
|
|
Land ‘Grab’, ‘Acquisition’: TOTAL REMEDY, NOT NEWS VITAL, By Dhurjati Mukherjee, 20 March 2 |
|
|
Open Forum
New Delhi, 20 March 2024
Land ‘Grab’, ‘Acquisition’
TOTAL REMEDY, NOT NEWS VITAL
By Dhurjati Mukherjee
The
alleged land grabbing at Sandeshkhali village in West Bengal by a TMC leader
continues to hit headlines, but such incidences shouldn’t come as a big
surprise as the poor can rattle off cases of their land being unfairly taken
either by government or business houses with support of political leaders. It’s
a phenomenon across the country oft heard and rather could well even get
camouflaged under the term land acquisition.
This
case has, however, drawn much more attention unlike others as it’s got
entangled in the murky BJP-TMC rivalry and the alleged sexual abuse of the
village women, which of course is
unacceptable in any civil society. Developments such as Prime Minister Modi
referring to the incident innumerable times during his recent visits to the
state; a division bench of Calcutta High Court directing the state to file an
affidavit stating the plan to restore the farmlands allegedly grabbed and
turned into pisciculture ponds; directing the CBI to file an affidavit stating
how protection could be given to those who had lodged police complaints against
land grabbing and sexual torture, domake news and shall be forgotten later.
The larger
picture, of land grab or land acquisition, which has been a phenomenon in the
country since the 50s and 60s, simply gets lost. It would not be wrong to recall
that even the government has somewhat forcibly taken land from people for
various projects like widening of roads and highways, railway projects, power
projects etc. And this has been done by paying a paltry sum to the villagers.
At that
time, there was no National Rehabilitation Policy, and the government didn’t deem
it necessary to rehabilitate them properly so that these poor people could make
a living at their new site. The poor were put to great distress,and some even squandered
the money received in liquor and died due to untreated diseases like TB.
Likewise, there’s the problem of taking away of tribal land and inadequate
compensation been given, with suggestions coming that a national mission for
effective implementation of FRA be set up so that all claims are
sympathetically considered.
Recall,
the Tatas took away land from the poor tribals in building the township and the
steel plant in Jamshedpur as per various reports to substantiate this. The
suffering of those whose land was taken away had been documented as survival continued
to haunt them. Insofar as land acquisition is concerned, government could justify
it on grounds that it has been taken for essential infrastructure projects, but
the question remains who benefits the most from such action. The roads and
highways, which are normally 6-lane or even wider, to facilitate faster
movement of traffic may indirectly help the greater community but essentially
such movement of cars benefit the rich and middle-income sections of society.
It is
well-known that the land acquisition laws that India inherited from colonial
times were undoubtedly heavily loaded against the interests of landowners and
other people dependent on land for their livelihood. The Acts passed have enhanced
the scale of compensation to be received by landowners and additionally
provided for their rehabilitation and resettlement (R&R) in the event
of displacement.
In fact,
the Land Acquisition Rehabilitation and Resettlement (LARR) Act of 2013 diluted
most of the ruthless provisions of land acquisition act of 1894 and, most
importantly, it made andeliberate attempt to put in place the building block
for easy accessibility of land. It included the Act’s fundamental change--the
introduction of compulsory prior consent from the farmer for acquiring land.
Secondly, the major change in terms of replacing the administrative coercion
for land acquisition with market transaction and increased finance to those
left without land or livelihood. Thirdly, the Act also provided for a new
national wide institutional architecture for rehabilitation and resettlement.
Due to these changes, the 2013 Act has been considered as progressive and
people-oriented act but only theoretically.
Most states
did not think it fit to judiciously enforce the provisions of the Act, as is
the case with others. Moreover, with most of the state governments demarcating
lands as Special Economic Zones, the problem has been getting worse. In recent
years, the Act has been violated and its said farmers have to unwillingly part
with their land with very little compensation and a bleak future.
Land
acquisition is indeed a sensitive subject and there are reports indicating that
people whose land has been virtually taken have not benefitted to the extent
they should have. It is critical ry to take stock of how much land has been
taken away in the last five decades or so and whether the people, whose land
has been taken away, are properly rehabilitated, as per the National
Rehabilitation Policy, and earning enough for a decent livelihood for
themselves and their family.
Plus,
the need to have case studies of land mafias, across states including West Bengal,
Jharkhand and Bihar,who takeover land by paying a paltry sum of compensation to
further their own business. It is also feared that in majority cases, the
people who take away such land have the blessings of the ruling party, and in
some others, leaders get a share of such transactions.
Not only
should fair and just compensation be given, but culprits who cheat the poor in
the process of acquiring land must be brought to book. Experts have rightly sought
the need for an independent expert committee to look into the right of the land
loser to get fair compensation and transparency in land acquisition as also his
consent in the matter. Unfortunately, the Act does not provide clear guidelines
for calculation of what could be said ‘fair compensation’. And needs
correction, keeping in view the rehabilitation aspect of the land loser. Additionally,
there should be judicious resettlement and rehabilitation of the families
affected. Failure to comply with these provisions should be viewed strictly and
made punishable. Headlines of land grab or action against a solitary case is
not a remedy.---INFA
(Copyright, India News & Feature Alliance)
|
|
Perpetual Dance Of Democracy: ONE NATION, ONE POLL, ANYONE?, By Poonam I Kaushish, 19 March 2024 |
|
|
0Political Diary
New Delhi, 19 March 2024
Perpetual Dance Of
Democracy
ONE NATION, ONE POLL,
ANYONE?
By Poonam I Kaushish
Its’ party
time folks as India readies for its greatest nautanki of democracy: General elections April-May. Amidst the
bugle sounding BJP’s rallying cry for ‘Ab
ki baar 400 paar’ and Congress President Kharge warning it could well be
the last election and death knell for federalism, Ex-President Kovind
Committee’s 320-pages report recommending a two-step electoral process: Lok
Sabha and Assemblies elections followed by municipal and panchayat polls within 100 days has caught the zeitgeist this week.
Including the
suggestion that once the appointed date to bring into force provisions for
transition to simultaneous polls is fixed, “tenure of all State Assemblies
constituted in any election after the appointed date would come to an end on
expiry of Lok Sabha’s full term irrespective of when an Assembly was
constituted.” Moreover, Constitutional amendments to this effect would not need
ratification by States.
Questionable are we
moving to ‘One nation, One Election?’ Specially as the country has witnessed
400 polls to Lok Sabha and State Assemblies till date. And given Law Commission
had thrice — 1999, 2015 and 2018 — argued for simultaneous elections to “free
citizens, Parties and Government from encumbrance of asynchronous elections.
Ditto Parliamentary Committee
2016 which said holding simultaneous elections would reduce massive expenditure
incurred in holding polls, underscored by Election Commission pegging cost of
holding simultaneous elections at Rs 4,500 crore.
Undeniably, simultaneous
elections could be economically viable and a big saving for exchequer. Welcome,
as it would help avoid disruptions in governance and policy paralysis due to
frequent polls as once a Party is elected and Government formed it can get down
to work, take hard decisions in public interest and concentrate on delivering
good governance without worrying about
its impact on vote banks.
Think. Several good
initiatives are dumped due to electoral considerations lest it upset a caste,
community, religion or region. All, becoming victims of policy shutdown, mismanagement
and poor implementation.
Let’s face it. Post 2019 Lok Sabha elections, we witnessed
35 State Assembly polls. Now alongside Lok Sabha we have Odisha, Andhra,
Arunachal and Sikkim followed by Maharashtra-Haryana October, Jharkhand November. February 2025 Delhi and December Bihar goes to
polls.
With 15 Parties
opposing the report, challenge is the procedural details and Government’s disregard
of citizens’ right to removing non-performing Governments. Besides, fear it
militates against the federal structure of multiple diversities and Constitution’s
spirit along-with complex legal procedures that Kovind report proposes for bringing
Constitutional amendments which needs to be weighed carefully to allay fears of
“infringing federalism.”
More. Opposition
perceives one-nation-one-poll as imposition of BJP;s political agenda and
extension of its ideological preference for homogeneity and uniformity vis-à-vis faith, customs, language,
dress and diet given federal relations are fraught in rival ruled States. And it
hinders political accountability and performance scrutiny.
Recall, post Independence,
elections to Lok Sabha and State Assemblies were conducted simultaneously October
1951-May 1952 until Nehru Cabinet blotted the copybook by dismissing CPI-led
Government in Kerala 1059. But with political instability gaining ground in the
sixties, the cycle of simultaneous elections got disrupted.
While Punjab, Bihar
and UP couldn’t complete their tenures on three occasions between 1967-1980,
Odisha Assembly witnessed five elections during that period and West Bengal Assembly
four elections 1967-1972. Resulting in many unstable Governments at Centre and
States, leading to early dissolution of Lok Sabha or Assemblies whereby India
could never go back to holding simultaneous elections again.
Moreover, expenditure spiralled,
doubling to over Rs 23 crores in 1980, further doubling to Rs 54 crores 1984
and Rs 154 crores 1989. In 1991expenses shot up to Rs 359 crores, 1999 to Rs
880 crores, 2004 Rs 1300 crores, 2014 Lok Sabha elections Rs 30,000 crores and staggering
Rs 60,000 crores in 2019.
However, the legal and Constitutional
position on Lok Sabha/ State Assembly term is challenging and requires
amendments, including ratification by States to avoid future legal confrontation.
An example: Article 83(2) and 172(1) aver Lok Sabha/ State Assembly term
respectively should be for five years from date of its first sitting.
But, both do not have a fixed term
and can be dissolved earlier. Further, the provisos allow extension of Parliament/Assembly's
term for six months at a time following a ‘proclamation of emergency.’
Besides, Article 356 allows Centre
to bring a State under President's rule by prematurely dissolving its Assembly.
But, the Anti-Defection Act, 1995 and Supreme Court placed several safeguards to
prevent misuse of this power.
Kovind’s proposal is not finding
takers among INDIA Parties. Why should we agree to truncated tenure of our
State Government, is a common refrain. They believe Government’s motive of
simultaneous elections is to bridge BJP’s weakness in Southern States where it
is hampered byt linguistic sub-nationalism and ideology.
“It is motivated by political considerations, as when
concurrent elections are held voters tend to vote for the same Party. BJP knows
it has unparalleled dominance at national level. Also, poll issues at Centre
and States are different which would create confusion. A Party could be
deserving of support at the Centre for its policies and performance at the
national level. Yet, it could be deserving of popular punishment and defeat for
its policies and performance at State level. Also, this fractious process would
strain our federal fabric,” said a Congress leader.
Some argue a fixed term for Lok Sabha/ State
Legislatures goes against Parliamentary democracy’s basic tenets. What happens
if after simultaneous polls, an Assembly’s five-year term is interrupted by
political realignments? Clearly, this would help the dominant national Party at
the Centre and disadvantage the regional player.
What happens if a Government falls
at the Centre or State mid-term? Or if a Government enjoying people’s mandate is voted out, it would
continue to hold office or be replaced by another Government, which might not
necessarily enjoy the popular mandate?
Plainly, a Government which lacks
the confidence of the House would be foisted on people, with no say in the
matter. Smacking, of de facto
dictatorship or monarchical anarchy, an idea which translates into
unrepresentative governance. It would impose artificial fixity on legislatures
terms at Centre and States which is at odds with a system given its staggering
diversity.
To avoid this EC suggests a no-confidence
motion against a Government must come alongside a confidence motion for another
Government and Prime Minister and voting for both motions done simultaneously.
Ditto in State Assemblies.
As and when India ushers in ‘One Nation, One
Election’ it will not be the first country to do so. In Germany, Bundestag
(Lower House), Landtags (State Assembly) and local elections are held
simultaneously. Philippines, too conducts simultaneous elections every three
years, though it has a Presidential form of Government.
True, there are cogent arguments on either side:
Development vs accountability?
Electoral expenses vs political
choices? Governance vs electoral
fairness? Given how elections have an
almost talismanic power in the country’s democracy the stakes couldn’t be
higher.
Remember, elections
are the bedrock of our democracy, we should avoid polls duplication. With
States perpetually in election mode, managing Government is akin to running
with the hare and hunting with the hound. India’s democracy should not be
reduced to a tu-tu mein-mein between
Parties all the time. ---- INFA
(Copyright India News & Feature Alliance)
|
|
Electoral Bonds Shear Rs 29 Tr: BANKS, ECONOMY IN TURMOIL, By Shivaji Sarkar, 18 March 2024 |
|
|
Economic
Highlights
New
Delhi, 18 March 2024
Electoral Bonds Shear Rs 29 Tr
BANKS, ECONOMY IN TURMOIL
By Shivaji Sarkar
The Indian
economy may or may not have matured, it has specialised in its murky Bombay stock
operations. It did not crash alone on Wednesday. Two days earlier, on Monday,
too the chinks were noticed in the State Bank of India shares in the wake of the
Supreme Court’s firmness on submission of details on electoral bonds (EB). In
two months, the market has dumped a huge loss of Rs 29 lakh crore. The small
caps also took a hit of Rs 30,246 crore portraying far from a glowing picture.
The
losses are the biggest since Covid-19. On March 11, the market lost, Rs 3.15
lakh crore mostly hitting the SBI, followed by Rs 13.9 lakh crore losses across
the board, including the Adani group, on March 14. In two sessions the market lost
Rs 17.05 lakh crore or almost 30 per cent equivalent of the total central budgetary
amount. It tanks over 900 points on Wednesday and on Monday it loses 617.75
points. Together it is a bigger loss than March 13, 2020, when the fall was
estimated at minus 14.2 per cent.
Not to
forget that in the wake of the Hindenberg disclosures, the stock market crashed
by 1168 points or almost Rs 12 lakh crore on January 23, 2024, the biggest in
recent times. Most hits were taken by the groups of Adani, Zee and IRCON. In just
about two months, the market has jolted the country with a Rs 29 lakh crore wipe
out. The 2024-25 budget is of Rs 47.65 lakh crore.
Complicating
the issue, the retail traders as a new phenomenon are also suffering. Volumes
in retail trades multiplied since 2019, when it overtook the US. Murkier operations
are in sight. An index of small-cap stocks lost more than Rs 30,246 crore in
market value in less than two weeks through March 13. In 2023, Indian investors
traded 85 billion in small cap, according to SEBI, in which 90 per cent of
active traders lost.
In
2021-22, investors lost $ 5.4 billion, or $ 1468 apiece, a big sum, for a
country with per capita GDP of $2300. This happens through dream cyber kiosks
that mushroomed of Whatsapp, Facebook, Telegram and Instagram. The online media
carry advertisements by CEOs of top companies alluring to multiply Rs 500 investments.
As per SEBI these are mere traps.
Are the
electoral bonds the big shakers? Perhaps. Investors are wary of disclosures of
their identities at election time. The way foreign portfolio investors withdrew
from the market faintly indicates this. There have been many MoUs with houses
in West Asia and other countries.
Some
days back, SEBI Chairman Madhabi Puri Buch had raised concern over ‘frothiness
and bubbliness’. On Thursday, Uday Kotak of the Kotak group also says there is
‘frothiness’. The jargon does not say much except that the regulators’
awareness of murkiness and their inability to check it.
In its
statement to the court the SBI says that of the 22, 207 electoral bonds, 22,030
were purchased. The remaining were deposited in the Prime Minister’s relief
fund. Two documents were filed with the Election Commission of India, one
mentioning names of political parties and the other detailing the bonds
redeemed by them. The other set contains the details of electoral bonds purchasers.
The total amount has not yet been disclosed though the EC announced that the
list has been uploaded on its website.
It is
interesting to note that the Delhi High Court had declared the election donations
illegal just prior to the 2014 elections. On 29 March 2014, the court observed
that both the Congress and BJP broke laws by accepting cash from companies
owned by London-listed Vedanta group (Vedanta Resources) between 2004 and 2012.
Sterlite Industries India and Sesa Goa, two companies then registered in India
but whose controlling shareholder was Vedanta, donated Rs 87.9 million in total
to the Congress between 2004 and 2012. Sesa Goa donated Rs 14.2 million to the
BJP, according to the Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR) and presented it
in the court.
An
agency report says that a Prudent Electoral Trust has raised $272 million since
its creation in 2013, funnelled “roughly 71 per cent of that to BJP. The trust
donated $20.6 million to the Congress as well”. It mentions that eight business
groups donated to the trust. Nobody has denied receiving corporate funding. The
controversy is limited to the factor whether their names and total funding to
the parties be disclosed or not.
On
February 15, the Supreme Court struck down the Electoral Bond scheme or anonymous
donations to political parties, as unconstitutional, violating right to information
under Article 19(1) A of the Constitution. The court also quashed the
amendments made to the Income Tax Act and the Representation of People Act,
which made the donations anonymous.
During
the last 10 years, electoral trusts reportedly disbursed about Rs 2557.74 to
various political parties. Donations are stated to have 360 per cent growth. The
growth of donations was phenomenal from 2018 to 2022. Political parties
received Rs 9191.41 crore through electoral bonds, with the ruling parties always
receiving higher funding.
The
court held that the scheme cannot be justified by saying that it would help
curb black money in politics. Instead, it said that transparency in political
funding cannot be achieved granting absolute exemptions and feared that such
fundings could have a quid pro quo. The top court’s actions rattled the market
as such dealings create crisis of credibility and confidence.
The
stock market is not an indication of economic growth. A small fall in the
market capex, however, severely impacts the health of the banks. Since the
Harshad Mehta scam in 1992, a number of Indian banks and FIs collapsed or merged
and now the SBI, Indusind and some other banks are in disarray. The market may
recover, but the banking process takes a severe beating.
This
also raises questions about high electoral expenses. The court did have this in
mind like the petitioner, ADR. Besides, travel costs have increased, which is
owed to the artificially high pricing of petroleum, natural gas, coal and now
even electricity. It is also linked to unnecessary toll on highways jacking up
inflation to over 5.5 per cent despite low international crude cost. Favours for
construction contracts of projects are also questionable, not to forget that rising
costs have a cascading effect.
Market regulators
need severe course correction. Losing such huge amount of money in just two
months is a serious jolt to the economy and the banking sector. And it may not
be the last of such national trauma. Undoubtedly, it would be interesting to
watch how it impacts the elections. ---INFA
(Copyright, India News & Feature Alliance)
|
|
| | << Start < Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next > End >>
| Results 46 - 54 of 5997 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|