The Jan Lokpal movement has already entered in its ninth month starting from April, 2011. Do we have any result yet? In the formal terms (rather on the paper work), I would say it is too far away from achieving what it set out to achieve and hence, it has still a long way to go. But, it has achieved a lot in terms of public awareness. It has done the next to impossible task of pulling the allegedly indifferent middle class of India along with others to the streets for a common cause. That in itself is a big achievement. Team Anna is still pushing for a strong Lokpal bill travelling all across the country and through public mobilization. I have been following it closely through ever fast news channels and friends. There are still a few reservations and confusions about the authenticity of team Anna pursuing government for JLP. Here are a few and my opinion about them.
The first that I hear many a times is that MP's are elected representatives of the people and parliament is the supreme in a democracy. They should not be forced by someone outside the parliament for a particular law. Firstly, some people might even doubt if MP's are really the fair representatives of the people with all the irregularities involved in the elections. I would still like to believe that majority of them are elected fairly. But the question I want to raise is if they truly represent the views of the people once they are sent to the parliament by the people. In an ideal democracy the MP's should discuss any issue with the people ( with the help of lower representative bodies like gram sabha or mohalla sabha) and convey it to the party or the parliament and if there is any difference of opinion, it is his duty to convince the concerned sides. I seriously doubt if that happens in our present democratic system. Presently, the party issues a whip for all its MPs and they have to follow it even if they have different view. We all accept the supremacy of the parliament, but at the same time, it should represent people not individual parties.
Second, Team Anna is not elected by the people. How can they claim to represent them? I agree, they are not elected by people, but they have also never claimed to be one. As a citizen of India, they have all the right to ask for a particular law. They have been just doing that and in the process got the support of the people who have the same opinion on this particular subject. The proposed JLP has gone through several round of discussions and has gone though many improvisations and it's still open changes on a logical basis. In fact, the present form is probably the 20th version of the original. So, it will be wrong to say that it is their bill, rather the JLP is the bill formed (or improvised) by the people of the country.
Third, is Anna Hazare blackmailing the government by fasting? Fasting is totally legal, ethical and powerful tool of protest in a democracy. It has been employed many times before and I don't think there is anything wrong with it. Most importantly, Nobody suffers because of it except for the person who is doing it. The fact is, it is not the fast of the Anna Hazare which is disturbing the government, but it is the backing of the people that the movement has garnered which is giving the sleepless nights to the government. There has been many other indefinite fasts (some even fatal) and much longer, but the government wasn't bothered by them because they did not have this kind of people's support. And this movement would have been faded as well if the people of the country were not fed up of the corruption that they face everyday.
The setting up of the deadline (though it was enough time) baffled me a bit in the starting because this kind of a law needs time to be drafted. But going by the incidents and intentions shown by the government in last nine months, I think this is the right way forward. Eight months are more than enough to draft any law. Whole constitution was prepared in about 2 years.
It is not about the time required, but the political will and honesty required to draft this law which is lacking in present system for understandable reasons. Nobody wants to give away his power easily and this time also it is not going to be any exception. You have to always fight for your rights in any part of world and this cause, I would say, is quite sacred and worth fighting for.
The first that I hear many a times is that MP's are elected representatives of the people and parliament is the supreme in a democracy. They should not be forced by someone outside the parliament for a particular law. Firstly, some people might even doubt if MP's are really the fair representatives of the people with all the irregularities involved in the elections. I would still like to believe that majority of them are elected fairly. But the question I want to raise is if they truly represent the views of the people once they are sent to the parliament by the people. In an ideal democracy the MP's should discuss any issue with the people ( with the help of lower representative bodies like gram sabha or mohalla sabha) and convey it to the party or the parliament and if there is any difference of opinion, it is his duty to convince the concerned sides. I seriously doubt if that happens in our present democratic system. Presently, the party issues a whip for all its MPs and they have to follow it even if they have different view. We all accept the supremacy of the parliament, but at the same time, it should represent people not individual parties.
Second, Team Anna is not elected by the people. How can they claim to represent them? I agree, they are not elected by people, but they have also never claimed to be one. As a citizen of India, they have all the right to ask for a particular law. They have been just doing that and in the process got the support of the people who have the same opinion on this particular subject. The proposed JLP has gone through several round of discussions and has gone though many improvisations and it's still open changes on a logical basis. In fact, the present form is probably the 20th version of the original. So, it will be wrong to say that it is their bill, rather the JLP is the bill formed (or improvised) by the people of the country.
Third, is Anna Hazare blackmailing the government by fasting? Fasting is totally legal, ethical and powerful tool of protest in a democracy. It has been employed many times before and I don't think there is anything wrong with it. Most importantly, Nobody suffers because of it except for the person who is doing it. The fact is, it is not the fast of the Anna Hazare which is disturbing the government, but it is the backing of the people that the movement has garnered which is giving the sleepless nights to the government. There has been many other indefinite fasts (some even fatal) and much longer, but the government wasn't bothered by them because they did not have this kind of people's support. And this movement would have been faded as well if the people of the country were not fed up of the corruption that they face everyday.
The setting up of the deadline (though it was enough time) baffled me a bit in the starting because this kind of a law needs time to be drafted. But going by the incidents and intentions shown by the government in last nine months, I think this is the right way forward. Eight months are more than enough to draft any law. Whole constitution was prepared in about 2 years.
It is not about the time required, but the political will and honesty required to draft this law which is lacking in present system for understandable reasons. Nobody wants to give away his power easily and this time also it is not going to be any exception. You have to always fight for your rights in any part of world and this cause, I would say, is quite sacred and worth fighting for.
great article Ashish! :)
ReplyDeleteA nicely written article, though I disagree with most of what you say.
ReplyDeleteFirst, one of the advantages of a representative democracy is that the people are not asked to express opinions on each pending decision. For example, let’s think of the extension of an airport. The people who live close to the airport would always vote against it while the people who benefit from the airport (those who work there or those who use it frequently) would always support it. From a MP I expect the quality to make a decision by taking into account the pros and cons.
Second, fasting is totally legal, ethical and powerful tool of protest in a totalitarian or oppressive system of ruling – but not in a democracy, where people’s opinion is quantitatively determined through elections. It’s not true that no one else suffers from the fasting because the person who fasts – if supported by enough followers – shifts the moral responsibility of his death/survival to the government. I consider this highly blackmailing.
Third, lakhs of followers make an impressive crowd – yet they are far from a majority in a people of a billion. Those perceived majorities can be quite misleading. Take Stuttgart 21 in Germany as an example, a democratically decided project with the aim of modernizing the railway around Stuttgart. Mass protests formed as soon as the first baggers began with the work. Media and social networking hyped the impression that the whole public was against the project. Later, a public referendum resulted in 58.8% support for the project.
This does not mean that I am supporting corruption or against a Lokpal bill. Only the means of protest are not adequate in modern India’s democratic system. Furthermore, with less than 60% turnout in the last national elections most likely many of those who now so vehemently criticize the government did not even make use of their right to decide who will be ruling.
I disagree with Maya's views.. so what does one suggest we do? just sit quietly?
ReplyDeleteWe have no rule in our constitution that allows the people to say that the govt is not doing what we expected it to do and then vote them out. Once elected the govt rules for 4 years till it loses majority in parliament, or its voted out in next elections. Our constitution in itself is weak and full of loopholes. something that would hold good the for the country 60 yrs back.
Saying that we elected the govt is fine. But if the govt is not doing what it promised as per its election manifesto, then we have all the rights to protest. This is completely allowed in a democracy. Else it amounts to a dictatorship where people are forced to accept what the government does.
Do we have any other means of protest that will be of more impact?
We can't just generalize that those who are protesting didn't use their rights to decide whom to vote. Many educated people also vote, but we make a minority compared to the poor people the politicians prey on during elections, pay them money and make them vote for those politicians.
A 58% support for a project is also a majority vote, and atleast Germany has a public referendum. If we have a public referendum in India, the government will be thrown out. We have a democracy, but we don't even have a referendum on major issues.
Just because we elected the government doesn't mean that they are perfect who can understand what the public needs at all points in time. 4 years of a government without any feedback from the public will not work in a country where we have a majority of poor people who can be easily bought by money.
The present government is the most incompetent one we have had since Independence, and the PM has time to celebrate Rajnikanth's birthday when we have thousands dying of hunger every day. Saying that we shouldn't protest against such ineffectiveness amounts to supporting the deaths of so many people.
Totally agree Nitya.
ReplyDelete@Maya, democracy is not at all about just voting once in five years and then sleep for rest of the term. The democracy has to include people in decision making. The public referendum is the best way to do that. And in all the referendum conducted till date on Lokpal, overwhelming majority has been in its favor. So, Its not that people coming for protest are the only ones supporting it.
You just said what I wanted to say. The fasting can not make any difference if its not supported by the public. So basically, people do want a strong lokpal which the government is always shying away from.
I agree with Ashish that democracy is not just to vote in five years and then sleep for the rest.
ReplyDeleteThere are ways of protests in a democracy such as demonstrations which are indeed peaceful. I have not heard someone is organizing huge demonstrations to motivate people about the discrepancies in Lokpal bill before Anna has started the fasting. I didn't even hear about people's suggestion when the bill (which has been due over four decades) was put in govt guzzet after the first reading in parliament. So people were not aware of such a bill before one of the most non-democratic ways of affairs has started. It's not governments problem. It's the problem of media which would have made people aware of such a thing and it's the problem of people where we hardly bothered such a bill is due or not. So we cannot blame govt and wash our hands.
Violence is anti-democratic, whether towards oneself or towards others. Fasting is nothing but violence against oneself and forcing others to follow your ideas. The most important in a democracy is to make people's voice audible to the rulers, which includes media, demonstrations, booklets and so on. And it should not be about whether you support anna's fast, instead whether you support the bill. Nobody is arguing whether do we need the Lokpal or not. The issue is Anna's fasting and the ultimatum, to me which sounds nothing but a dictator in make. I don't feel its my voice. And referendum is the last choice not just after fasting some guy somewhere with a few followers.
And you cannot ask whether you need this govt or not in a referendum. That is what the elections are meant for! And about four years of govt, so far India had five years of parliament.
Maya, let me get your facts and arguments corrected first:
ReplyDelete1) The JLP protests have been total non-violent. Not even a single casualty yet.
2) There were huge rallies organized before this movement started in April by IAC team. You can find videos on Youtube also. Yes, the media did not give any attention before April, but you are wrong in saying that government has no responsibility in spreading awareness. They do it from time to time for other issues, like AIDS, education, Polio etc. They could have done this as well if they felt it was necessary. And do u mean to say that people are just coming for fun in these rallies without being aware of it? People do know abt JLp that's why they r supporting or opposing.
3) This fast protest was never first choice option. There were a lot of letters sent to PMO and other big politicians, but when there was no response , they had to resort to it. And fasting is not at all violent.
4) I am not talking for referendum to choose govt., but on an issue like this referendum is the best choice.
5) People are not coming to support Anna Hazare in these protest but to support Lokpal only.
@Ashish, there was a press meet by IAC once against anti-corruption movement, if i remember correctly last october against CWG scam and there were couple more protests in delhi (Dandi II and so on) with 20K people or so. And anna started fasting on 7th April 2011.
ReplyDeleteNow comes the figure, 20000 people is nothing in India. It's a crowd but not a majority. This is what i said before as the perceived majority. But that doesn't make India of 1b. Why there wasn't anything else afterwords before the 'legendary' fast has started.
People are not coming for fun. They have a purpose and I don't believe that the purpose is wrong either. I, being a believer of democracy, cannot believe that fasting is the right means of doing things. I already said why I think fasting is a violence and anti-democratic.
And regarding referendum, what i meant was in the previous comment, there was a statement if there will be a public referendum the govt is out. I was referring to that, that actually elections are conducted for expressing people's opinion on whom should be ruling us.
@Maya, if elections are held every year, then I will agree that we should use elections to voice our choice of government. But if elections are held only once in 4 years, then if in the meanwhile, the govt has not lifted a finger to do anything, then I think the people have the rights to protest. Saying that I will wait for another 2 years to get another govt will mean that those really affected by this govt have no voice at all.
ReplyDeleteThere are thousands who die every day in India, affected by rising prices and the corruption in our country. For them, a 20k group of people protesting for better governance is like a boon from heaven. People like us who are far away from the ground reality will never be bothered about such things. But try to imagine a family that has been told that it is not a part of the BPL because they earn more than 30 rupees per day while our politicians swindle away crores of Rupees.
Democratic methods of protest will apply for a government that is democratic. Such an incompetent government deserves no less than a coup.
I am not very familiar with the history of the lokpal bill in particular and it’s not my topic. My comments relate to my understanding of democracy only.
ReplyDeleteDemocracy, elections, opposition, press
There is good reason why in the majority of all democratic countries governments are elected for a term of several years, 4 or 5 typically, and cannot be voted out by the general public at any point of time. A country needs stability and political decisions shouldn’t be too short-sighted, which anyway they tend to be in democracies where governments soon start campaigning for the next elections. A government also needs to be able to pass unpopular but important bills which it couldn’t if either there were a referendum on every decision or if the public could get rid of a government at any point of time. Terms of a single year, as Nitya proposed, are ridiculously short. Italy, for example, has a history of short-lived governments, and it wasn’t very good country.
I completely agree that democracy does not mean that you lean back between the elections and let them do what they want for the full term. But giving the feedback is the generic role of both opposition and press. The opposition serves to question every proposal that the government makes and the press is supposed to provide the feedback by both informing the public about the politics of the government and informing the politicians about the response of the public.
And yes, certainly the next elections are the way to get rid of a government if that is what the majority wants.
Means of protest
Protest and active participation are not only perfectly legitimate in a democracy, but should even be encouraged. If I understand Maya correctly, she doesn’t question that either. Her point is which means of participation and protest are worthy of a democracy, and there I am completely with her.
The idea of democratic protest is to advertise your ideas by making yourself heard. You may organize a demonstration and mobilize as many followers as you can. You may write an article in a newspaper, blog, run a media campaign. You can also become a politician yourself by joining a party or founding one yourself. All these means have in common that you promote an idea but you don’t make a decision before finding out how the majorities are.
Violent forms of protest, on the other hand, try to force the government to act in a certain way without checking majorities. The support of the majority is merely assumed, which means that the organizers consider themselves in possession of ultimate wisdom – quite arrogant and not at all democratic; a notion that appears to be underlying Nitia’s statement “such an incompetent government deserves no less than a coup”. A hunger strike falls into the same category. It’s not non-violent. Violence against oneself with the aim of forcing somebody else to act is a form of violence too.
That said, I do not mean that all fasts in history were illegitimate. Circumstances that provide for no democratic means of protest leave no other choice and a non-democratic regime deserves no better. But merely the fact that you think a government within a democratic system is incompetent is not the same thing.
Referendum
Just to set one thing straight: Germany also has no referendums on a national level. We have referendums and petitions for a referendum in the constitutions of several German states, among them Bavaria. They worked fine on many occasions. I agree that a national referendum would be a good institution too; not to be used on every occasion, but for certain questions of overwhelming public interest I quite support it; and also to regain peace in a heated public debate, such as Stuttgart 21.
I absolutely leave it to the Indians to decide whether the lokpal bill is a case for a referendum. My statements just related to my understanding of democracy in general.
I agree with you Christian, but I would like to make a few points here:
ReplyDelete1) Opposition is indeed meant to question the bills, but referendum should not be done on all issues but it must be done at least for the bills which will directly effect the public.
2) You made the point on fasting protests. You may not know, but this Lokpal bill is pending for last 43 years in India and every time the govt. divert it somehow. This time again we had whatever bill we have only because of pressure from this movement. And I will again emphasize the point that one man fasting does not make any difference until he is supported by the people. It is not the fast but the support it has got which is being heard.