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)

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)

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)

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)

.