Political Diary
New Delhi,
21 September 2021
Our Autocratic
Parties
DEMOCRACY?
YOU JOKING
By Poonam I Kaushish
It’s
been a week of mea culpa, home truth and tutorials. Of ghisi-piti real politik whereby the old order changed yielding
place to new, yet underscoring that nothing has changed. Centralisation of
power among Parties national leadership calling the shots when Chief Ministers
are changed at will is symptomatic of a ‘High Command’ culture, resulting in
withering of internal democracy within.
The
anointment of Charanjit Singh Channi as Punjab’s Chief Minister is the latest satrapi-as-local branches showcasing
Congress trio of Sonia-Rahul-Priyanka are ‘alive and kicking.’ Notwithstanding,
that their sudden rise from a state of meaningless nothingness to an elevated
orbit of meaningful nothingness has Party leaders nervous.
Even
the much touted and much disciplined BJP has gladly chosen to get
“Congressised”. In the last seven months
the Modi-Shah combine have changed Chief Ministers four times in three States. Twice
in Uttarakhand March and July, Karnataka in July and Gujarat last week.
Thereby, showcasing that Prime Minister Modi is numero uno and calls the shots.
Less
said the better of our regional satraps who believe internal democracy comes
after hereditary feudalism wherein politics is parivar business with the family reigning supreme. Be it Samajwadi
where reins have shifted from patriarch Mulayam to aankhoin ka tara Akhilesh, RJD’s Lalu-Rabri ladla Tejashvi, DMK bhai-behan
Stalin-Kanimozhi.
BSP’s
Mayawati, Trinimool’s Mamata with bhatija
Abhishek, Abdullah’s National Conference, Chautala’s INLD, Akali Dal’s
Badal family of beta-bahu
Sukhbir-Harsimrat, LJP’s Paswan ghar ka
Chirag, RLD Ajit Singh’s beta Jayant Chaudhary, Pawar’s NCP putri prem Supriya et al! Certainly, the dadagiri of dynastic politics is robust, exposing the deep decay in
our political system.
In
a milieu where principles, value-based politics and internal debate and
discussions are conveniently overlooked and unceremoniously buried, all Parties
parrot the same hackineyed diatribe:
Only “High Command” can provide a Government of the people, by the
people and for the people.
Sprinkled
liberally with loads of desh bhakti and
balidaan. Hoping that a billion plus
vassals will be mesmerized to shower their choicest blessing. What is material is not whether those foisted
‘from above’ are deserving but that they are “made deserving”, by virtue of their
being ‘the chosen one.’
Welcome
to Incredible India which boasts of being the world’s largest democracy. But,
if truth be told, we are shamelessly ‘jo
hokum’ in our outlook and thought process.
Worse, most elected leaders prefer to function in the style of old
feudal lords. Party tickets are
distributed not on the basis of merit, but connections. If you want reprieve from law, seek the
blessings of the mai baap or undaata. If you want alms, go to the Master. Only the Master matters – and counts.
Confirming
that India’s parliamentary democracy has degenerated into a mindset. Only the outward trappings are democratic – naam ke waste. Indeed, the incredible foisting of a Chief
Ministers, Ministers, MPs, MLAs and leaders by the ‘High Command’ at the cost
of long-serving party workers is a highly disturbing trend fraught with grave
consequences.
Arguably,
if Indian democracy rests on the one-man-one vote principle and parachuting
leaders is the antithesis of electoral
politics, the obverse holds true. What is material is not whether the
candidates are ‘deserving’, but that they are “made deserving” by virtue of they
being the chosen one. All merrily banking on the right connection to ensure a
continuing bond. It’s all about bhaichara.
Undeniably,
there is a increasing tendency in Parties towards the concentration of power in
one or a few leaders at the top. Primarily, as personal
loyalty to the leader becomes most important. Two, Parties shy from conducting
free and fair internal elections regularly or hold organisational meetings.
Three, ordinary members do not get sufficient
information about Party happenings. Four, members do not have the means
or connections needed to influence decisions. Five, Parties do not keep
membership registers. Six, there is a questionable procedure of
distributing party tickets.
All
Parties conveniently forget the Constitution envisages Governments be run by
collective authority or collective wisdom. Yet, the opposite holds true as
Parties have found a lacuna in the Constitution which is silent on Parties or
guidelines for regulating the conduct of Parties, their nature and
qualification for putting up candidates for election to legislative bodies.
Pertinently,
only Section 29 (A) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 mandates the
registration of Parties. The Election Commission is also not equipped to
regulate their functioning. The Supreme Court in 2002 held that the EC cannot
take punitive action against registered political Parties for violating the
principles of inner-party democracy which makes regulation of the conduct and
functioning of Parties extremely difficult, reducing chances of their
democratic working.
It might
not have been in the contemplation of the Constitution-makers that though the
form of Government both at the Centre and States was fashioned after the British
Westminster style but Parties would be run on the US Presidential basis with a single
person or a few persons exercising real authority.
Importantly, the lack of
democratic functioning of Parties is mainly manifested in two fundamental
aspects. First, procedure for determining its leadership and composition are
not open and inclusive which adversely impacts the Constitutional right of
citizens to equal political opportunity to participate in politics and contest
elections.
Second, a Party’s
centralised mode of functioning alongside the stringent Anti-Defection Law
which deters Party legislators from voting in national and State legislatures
according to their individual preferences, instead elected representatives have
to strictly follow the Party whip during voting. Failure of do so results in
disqualification from the legislature.
Moreover, leadership is
mostly decided by a coterie of Party functionaries who holds sway over the
Party administration. Even when elections take place in which the members of
the national organisational or decision-making body of the Party participate,
the pre-determined choice of the Party elite is merely supported by the other
members.
Most of the
times, the elections to leadership positions are uncontested and unanimously
decided. Besides, in many instances, the ceremonial rubber stamp organisational
elections are also held after long intervals with serious irregularities.
According to a study by
Research Foundation for Governance in India on internal democracy in Parties
recently, it adhered that it is very difficult to remove Party leaders; there
is little discussion or consultation with ordinary members when setting the
Party agenda; young politicians find it difficult to climb ranks and influence
of family connections remains powerful.
Clearly, the
lack of transparency and accountability in the inner functioning of Parties has
serious consequences for the functioning of Parliamentary democracy. A democratic process as envisaged by the
Constitution cannot be meaningful without Parties participating and embracing
the democratic ethos.
Democracy requires more than just political
Parties. It requires strong political will emanating from irrefutable electoral
demands for inner-party democracy to lead India towards the process of
democratising its Parties. It requires that individuals encourage substantial
debate and seek compromise rather than abuse power.
The time has come to uphold true
democracy, democratize Parties and improve politics. Or else continue to wallow
in the political High Command cesspool and say goodbye to democracy? Choice is
yours! —INFA
(Copyright,
India News & Feature Alliance)
|