Political Diary

New Delhi, 20 June 2017

India’s Next Rashtrapati

DECODING MODI’s CHOICE

By Poonam I Kaushish

Political campaigns are designedly made into emotional orgies to distract attention from real issues. This rings true looking at the political manoeuvres to find a successor to President Pranab Mukherjee. A game of cards with a miniscule Opposition waiting for the majority NDA Government to make the first move or call a bluff.

There are no set rules, no set criteria it’s all about political permutations and combinations with wild card entries with the winner taking it all. Buttressed with accusations of communal overtones, Hindutva stamp, feigned hurt, parochialism et al. Reducing it to cross between a right wing vs centreist contest with an encyclopedia of clichés thrown in!

Whereby, it is not about the right man occupying Rashtrapati Bhavan or his credentials but all about sending a strong political message or to settle scores reveling in ‘He is ‘my-our’ man. With all Parties merrily exploiting the communal, caste, creed and region cards to garner votes and expand its share on India's political map. A precursor to the likely realignment of Opposition forces a la Mahagadhbandhan ahead of the 2019 Lok Sabha elections,

Undisputedly, with the majority numbers stacked for the BJP Prime Minister Modi has made plain the Party would get its hand-picked person, preferably saffron, ensconced on Raisina Hill along-with the next Vice President. Certainly, the NDA Government is holding consultations with Parties to build a consensus but this is a mere formality as the poll has been reduced to a one-horse race vis-à-vis the Opposition.

Various names are being bandied around: Jharkhand Governor Draupadi Murmu, a tribal woman leader from Odisha, UP Governor Ram Naik, metroman Sreedharan, Ex Lok Sabha Dy Speaker Kariya Munda dyed in RSS ideology, Union Social Justice Minister and Madhya Pradesh Dalit leader Thawar Singh Gehlot.

Undeniably, knowing that it does not have the numbers, it has not deterred the Opposition from playing party pooper and putting up a candidate just for the sake of one. They are within their legitimate right to make all efforts to use the contest as an opportunity to consolidate its ranks and test the extent to which unity and cooperation is possible among disparate anti-BJP formations.

Even as they quibble, complain and protest Modi farcical overtures of humouring them, what greatly troubles one is that small minds replete with petty games of one-upmamship are playing out on the political chessboard to “fix” Modi and Hindutva politics. Notwithstanding, NaMo’s message: We will make  "history”.

The issue is not who will be President but more important should he be elected on Party basis? Should caste consideration weigh in selecting the Presidential candidate? And should he be indebted to Parties for his election?

Questionably, why should the electorate for the President’s office vote on Party lines and be reduced to a game of egos, one-upmanship and majority power, 80% to 20% Opposition votes. That this has been the practice in earlier elections is no excuse.

True, Parties have every right to search, select and elect the best person as President by advising, canvassing and persuading their respective elected MPs and MLAs and like-minded Parties. But there should be no compulsions or pressures. An example: the three-way divided AIADMK is being vigourously wooed, coerced, cajoled etc. Ditto the case with other smaller regional outfits.

The Presidential and Vice Presidential Elections Act, 1952, specifically prohibits the exercise of ‘undue influence’ in such elections. In fact, Section 13 of the Act expressedly makes it an offence under Section 171 of the IPC. And a specific ground on which the President/Vice President election can be challenged.

Indeed, India has traversed a long way vis-à-vis a Presidential candidate’s credentials,. From being an Indian citizen 67 years ago, it has now percolated down to various isms: caste, creed or region. Undoubtedly, the practice of having the two highest offices adorned by persons from the North and South is healthy, but surely not at the cost of compromising on the best qualified persons to hold them.

A case in point. It matters little who becomes the President, tribal, Dalit, Brahmin or XYZ as it will not alleviate the respective community and annihilate all their pain and suffering. It’s all very well to grant reservations in jobs and legislatures, but to use this right for the Presidential office is offensive. It tantamounts to retreating into the past under the garb of promoting inclusiveness in our democracy.

Thus, in this all pervasive culture, our Presidents have come to be slotted and remembered not for their wisdom but as being South-Indian, Muslim, Brahmin, Dalit, woman and now belonging to a secular or Hindutva Party.  

Remember Indira Gandhi called for a “conscience vote” for VV Giri against Sanjeeva Reddy, her way of getting back at the 'Syndicate' which called her a ‘goongi gudiya'. Then nominating Zail Singh to counter Bhindrinwala in Punjab. Gone are the days, when people looked upon S Radhakrishnan as a philosopher statesman not as a Tamilian. Rajendra Prasad was never called a Bihari but known as a freedom fighter. Kalam was not viewed as a Muslim but a great scientist who took India’s defence capabilities to new heights.

Lastly, should a President be seen to be beholden to any Party? Not at all.  The Constitution is clear: The President has to be above Party politics to discharge his functions as per the Statute, and not follow the diktat of any Party. His position should not be used as a loyalty test, reward or compensation. Neither should a candidate be accused of lobbying with Parties to support his or her candidature. As once elected he has to shed all political robes and be recognized for his statesmanship, integrity, catholicity of mind and non-sectarian approach.

There is no room for an ‘activist’ President. His job is not to be a speed-breaker or to run hurdles for the Prime Minister. Yet he is neither a rubber-stamp nor a place to park superannuated leaders in recognition of their services to the ‘Party’ and certainly not a quid pro quo for a favour done.

Clearly, answers to these issues are vital. The polity has evolved in a fashion that makes the Presidential office a lot more than ceremonial specially against the backdrop of a fragmented,  divided and dejected Opposition, so crucial in a democracy to keep the Government in check.

In sum, NaMo has to ensure the institutional sanctity of the office is safeguarded. The country wants a President of the highest personal integrity, who adheres to the spirit of the Constitution and acts as the nation’s “conscience-keeper”. He should have the guts to speak out his mind on matters that concern the citizens vital to the growth of India’s nascent democracy, engage with his Government and not hesitate to send Bills back to the Cabinet for reconsideration, in case of disagreement.

India needs a giant with sterling leadership qualities free from political compulsions or executive burdens who can redefine the idea of India, not a pygmy who rides-roughshod over us. A President who will balance the ever-growing inherent contradiction within our polity, fulfil his Constitutional obligations without fear or favour. The country has had enough of tokenisms which hold out zero benefits for the people. ------ INFA

(Copyright, India News and Feature Alliance)