CHALLENGES TO DEMOCRACY

series of weekly lectures at 5 p.m. on every Friday

at Sahitya Academy Vyloppilly Hall, Thrissur

from 21st September 2007

Challenges to Democracy:

15th Lecture in the series on 31-12-2007  
By Sri. V.M. Sudheeran

Formerly, Niyama Sabha Speaker, Health Minister, M.P. and M.L.A.

I applaud in great appreciation Jananeethi Institute and its functionaries for initiating this lecture series on Challenges to Democracy. This is utmost important and highly essential considering the many threats to democracy not only in India, but also in every other country where democracy is foundation for political activity. Jananeethi Institute hereby has set an example to others how one should contribute to the development and progression of Parliamentary Democracy.

Before going into a critique of our democracy, we should first congratulate ourselves for guarding our democracy without much damage, as we see around us that many other nations that became independent along with us have subsequently gone back to military rule or dictatorship or controlled democracy in course of time.

However, today we are saddened to note, democracy has been reduced to casting of votes in elections. What does it mean to the voter after the elections? How do we define our democratic rights after elections are over? The whip is in the hands of the people. They are the masters. They must exercise their authority by pointing out when their representatives err and go wrong. This is precisely what Jananeethi is doing at the moment.

The foundation of Indian democracy is the FAITH of the people in Legislature, Judiciary and Executive. When that faith is shaken or hampered, democracy suffers.

Are our people losing faith in these great institutions? We are afraid, YES. What’s happening in our Parliament and Legislative Assemblies? These are the places where the voice of the people should resound. The dreams, expectations, hopes, anxieties and fears should be heard in Parliament and Assemblies through their representatives. Nevertheless, value based politics and political morality are steadily getting deteriorated in post independent India. The members of the House are preoccupied with how to disrupt and cripple the business of the House, and NOT to help the smooth and effective functions of the House consistent with the FAITH entrusted by the people.

I remember with pride and privilege the time I was elected for the first time to the Parliament. I was a novice in the House where Morarji Desai was the Prime Minister and eminent statesmen and very distinguished stalwarts in politics were seriously and responsibly engaged burning much of their oil studying every minute transaction in the House. It was a dignified experience to be part of the business of the House. There was clear agenda for every session and it was meticulously adhered to. Years after I went to Parliament again, only to be shocked and to be taken by dismay over the lawlessness and ruthlessness of the members of the House. If five or less members wanted to disrupt the House, they could do it by rushing into the “Well” of the House. Perhaps, I am afraid, the direct telecast of the transactions of the House became a causative factor for the ‘expressionism’ of the members rather than studious, serious and responsible interventions in the House. State Legislatures, perhaps, are better than Parliament in this regard. What is missing in the House is the critical, objective and substantial debate or deliberation over the matters brought in for the perusal of its members.  In short, there is no time devoted for truly serious and poignant issues.

There was a good practice of appointing a Select Committee constituted of subject experts to critically evaluate and assess every bill or amendment brought in for the consideration of the House. It has become history now. The present system is to leave such things to Subject Committee for over simplifying the procedure. Apparently there is no open debate or public discussion on such draft bills or amendments. They all get approved, the members of the House being unaware of what the transaction was or how it would affect the life of the ordinary citizen of the country of whom they are pledged to represent.

Even after the legislation completed, the Government is responsible to make Rules without which the Law can not be implemented.  The understanding and the statutory practice is that the Rules, so made, should be taken for thorough discussion and critical assessment. But often that does not happen. No body knows what transpires in between. And no body is worried of it at all.

We have a wonderful Constitution, profound and impeccable. But we desperately fail to make use of its provisions in its true spirit.

The recent controversial legislation brought in by the present political regime in Kerala to check the pits and flaws of the Self Financed Educational Institutions was good in spirit. But the Government failed to take the confidence of all concerned. In normal parlance, it must have been taken for public debate after advance notice and ample time given for formulation of public opinion and consensus arrived at. The present impasse and the shame attached to it could have avoided if we had adhered to proper procedure.

What’s happening to the Executive? The Council of Ministers that assumes power fails to maintain the public faith that it is the government of all. Well, those in public governance were elected to power by their party cadre. Once they form a Government, it should represent the entire people of the State, it should function as the TRUSTEE of the people, no matter to what political ideology they belong to.

The Government spends from the public exchequer. It does not keep the discernment, meticulous honesty and transparency while dealing with public money. Consequently, after some verbal exchanges between treasury bench and the opposition, millions and millions are unscrupulously written off without audit. At the most, what we can expect is the declaration of a judicial enquiry into the controversy. At the end of the day, those who raised the question in the House will not oblige to give proper evidence before the judicial commission. There ends the matter. Public money has lost its sanctity and value.

Rule of law and judicial process appear to be concerned of the ordinary citizen, not those who wield power and political dominance. Governance of the people and management of public wealth are well in the control of mafia groups. Mafia decides the destiny of the nation, the people. The rich have no scruple to plunder the public wealth. Those in power remain helpless and toothless.  

Democracy makes sense when, only when, an ordinary person gets his/her due without the intervention or mediation of a third party.

When the three-tire panchayat system became a reality, I had great expectations. Unfortunately, only less than 20% of the money allotted to grama panchayats is expended as per plan. No one knows what happens to the rest of the funds. Projects for the benefit of the people and for the public good are seldom brought to surface. If ever someone brings a good project which addresses the aspirations of the people, such plans are dismissed summarily.

What should I say about the Judiciary? It was Hon’ble Justice Barucha who said that at least 20% of the judges are corrupt. People get a feeling that the judiciary does not deliver justice, nor is the procedure fair and just. There are many undesirable tendencies emerging from the ‘temples of justice’.

I am a politician and hence would like to talk more about my own species. Government is formed by political parties. Hence it is true, they rule the people. It is a government by political parties. But I have the humiliation to admit and accept the fact – our politics is simply redundant and aimless. It has lost its message. It has nothing to catch the attention of the people. Political parties, without exception, should subject themselves to reformation and refinement. They need to civilize themselves, revamp their style of functioning. The politicians behave like corporate managers. It should go. Politics is not for politics, it should be for the people. Their concerns and anxieties should be that of the people, people of this generation and those to come. It is pity that the political parties give least importance to environmental and ecological subjects. Have they heard of global warming? Have they ever thought of our soil, water and air?

Where politicians fail to act, the civil society and voluntary groups emerge. It’s a welcome development. I can see the importance of Jananeethi in this context. Politicians need not think of them as rivals; on the other hand the voluntary sector fills the gaps left out by politicians.

The language of politics has become vulgar and indecent when it comes in dealing with the opponents. Parties and party leaderships have stooped to lowest levels of intolerance to critics, within and outside.

Too many political parties always throw threat to democracy. It will really cripple the functions of parliamentary democracy. In 1957 there were only four parties and four independents in Kerala Assembly. Where as today, there are thirteen parties in the Assembly and more than four outside the House. I do not think the State has the stamina to hold so many heavy weights. There should be some system to contain the number of parties.

Our political parties and their leadership badly require a code of conduct. The nexus between the criminals and politicians is an open truth in Kerala as well as in other parts of the country. The dissidents and divisionism within the parties are indication of the decadence and disintegration destabilizing democracy. Parties that groomed in military discipline too are facing factionist threats from within. Anarchy and disintegration within parties adversely affect governance and democratic network within the system.

Globalization is a reality. Well, who are the beneficiaries of globalization? Why there are so much corruption, injustice, organized violence, hate, vengeance, nepotism and exploitation in our society? Remember, Dr. Ambedkar himself wrote, unless the anxieties, agonies, and grievances of ordinary citizen of the country are adequately addressed by those in authority duly and responsibly, they will do away with every thing, no matter how good is our Constitution. Violence and extremism could be expressions of abject despair and angry against deprivation of justice. It is wrong to view at them simply as law and order problems only. People’s fury and outrage can not be put down by law and police alone; they need to be sorted out holding up principles of equity and fairness.  

It is not fair to keep changing one’s views and stances depending on the seat one occupy in the House. Those who come in power should grow beyond politics. What they need to do is to invite eminent statesmen and experts in different disciplines and chalk out a draft plan for at least five years or farther. Sadly what we have today is mere ‘adhoc-ism’. Let this day be gone!!

Similarly, too much politicization is dangerous to democracy. We need political honesty. When we go wrong, we should admit we go wrong. It is too bad and very dangerous to democracy to interpret every thing from political perspective, often too narrow, biased and ill conceived.

There should be strict law against defection in parties. Transparency and accountability in governance must be ensured. We should develop a culture of social audit and performance appraisal. The extravaganza and pomposity attached to party meetings and electioneering must be stopped.  Communalism and corruption are equally dangerous to democracy. The tendency to appease communal and religious forces during election times must go. Caste based, faith based campaigns should not be allowed. Why should we spend so much on elections? We all know that less than 15% votes can be canvassed through campaigns. The rest are sure votes that need no persuasions. If so, we need not spend so much. Let the State finance the costs of the electioneering of candidates subject to certain norms and regulations.

I would propose a Voters Council in every constituency that would monitor the performances of their Member of the House. Periodically they must assess and critically evaluate the Government and Council of Ministers.