Archive for June, 2024

30 Jun

50 years on…history repeats itself

Posted by vramani in political economy, public affairs. Tagged: , , .

June 25 is a date that has long receded in my memory. The sudden invocation of this date by the Prime Minister at the start of the 18th Lok Sabha triggered off many memories. I remember standing at a bus stop in Delhi on the morning of 26 June 1975 when I heard of the imposition of the emergency in India. I reached home to hear the voice of Indira Gandhi announcing the imposition of the internal emergency. As a politically naive college student with a passing interest in politics, the implications of the Emergency never struck home till far later. I saw the first display of opposition to the emergency when protesting students, including the then Delhi University Students’ Union President Arun Jaitley, were rounded up by the police and bundled into buses before their incarceration in prison.

Over the next 18 months till the end of 1976, we, the citizens of India, were bombarded with news of the remarkable changes taking place in the economy and society (reminiscent of the pronouncements in Orwell’s Animal Farm and 1984). As news of the demolitions in Turkman Gate in Delhi and the forced sterilisations filtered through to us through a largely quiescent print media, disgust and cynicism started building up in the general public. The 1977 Lok Sabha elections blew the safety cover off the pressure cooker, with the Congress party getting the least number of seats in 25 years after the 1952 elections.

The past few years are strangely reminiscent of the Emergency: the difference is in the use of the knife rather than the hammer to injure the body politic. The use of MISA during the emergency to detain political opponents has been replaced by laws like the UAPA and PMLA, which have been used to arrest those voicing dissent against or opposing the ruling dispensation, ostensibly on the vaguely worded grounds of threat to the integrity or sovereignty of India or the likelihood of striking terror in people or for economic offences. Just as the use of MISA was made immune from judicial review during the emergency through inclusion in the Ninth Schedule of the Constitution, the stringent provisions for grant of bail under Section 43D(5) of the UAPA and Section 45(1) of the PMLA make it very difficult to secure bail, as they virtually require an opinion of the judiciary that no prima facie case establishing guilt has been made out. The continued incarceration of a number of the accused in the Bhima-Koregaon case and of a serving Chief Minister and a former Deputy Chief Minister are evidence of the reluctance of the judiciary to grant bail even when the accused pose no flight risk and are not likely to tamper with the evidence or influence witnesses. As in MISA, the present scenario allows for continued detention for long periods while the investigating agencies take their own time to file chargesheets and the judicial process moves at a snail’s pace.

The cavalier attitude of the administration towards the rule of law is another feature common to the emergency and the present day. Excesses committed by the bureaucracy (and the police)  during the emergency have been well documented by the Shah Commission. Today, demolitions of even residential buildings, especially, but not restricted to, of the Muslim community, are carried out for apparent infractions like protesting against arbitrary executive actions or even alleged violation of anti-beef laws. There is a marked reluctance of the executive magistracy and the police to act firmly against hate speech and to strictly enforce the law when processions violate the rights of the minority community. The support of the police for the actions of vigilante groups in various states ruled by the BJP emboldens these groups to enforce their writ in matters relating to alleged “beef” consumption, “love jihad” and “conversion”. Indira Gandhi’s concept of a “committed bureaucracy” seems to have taken shape in the recent decade.

During the emergency, in the famous words of the paterfamilias of the BJP, L.K. Advani, “when the press was asked to bend, they crawled.” The situation today is more pathetic: large sections of the media genuflect before power and fail in their duty of keeping a check on executive excess. Not only that, they have taken it upon themselves to put a gloss on all actions of the government.

The Supreme Court faced its moment of truth during the Emergency in its inability to confront the denial of civil liberties by the government, best exemplified by its judgment in the ADM Jabalpur case. Today, the higher judiciary (the Supreme Court and High Courts) are facing the stonewalling by the central government on appointment of judges. Delays in hearing cases with major constitutional implications and perplexing, contradictory judgments by the judiciary at various levels has eroded the faith of the citizen in the judicial process. Unfortunately, in comparison with its 1977 predecessor, which conducted the then Lok Sabha elections admirably, the Election Commission of India has, in the recent Lok Sabha elections, been far too lenient in enforcing the Model Code of Conduct, leading to a rather bitter, acrimonious election campaign: but then those were times when, in spite of political differences, decency prevailed in public life. The Comptroller and Auditor General of India has been rather chary in releasing reports on the performance of Ministries and PSUs in recent years, in marked contrast to the alacrity it displayed in the pre-2014 period.

What marks the difference between the environment of the emergency days and that of the present day are the deplorable fissures that have developed between different communities and groups in today’s society, as well as the atmosphere of bigotry and intolerance that seems to envelop society like a dark cloud. The Lok Sabha Speaker, just after his election to that august post, called for two minutes silence in remembrance of the dark memories of an emergency that is half a century old. Given the serious reservations in large sections of civil society and the political class about the infringements and restrictions on basic human rights and freedoms in the last decade and the erosion of trust and fraternity between social groups, it would have been in the fitness of things if, instead of the two minute silence, he had announced a full day discussion in the Lok Sabha to ascertain the views of members, especially those from the augmented opposition benches, about the worsening social cohesion and harmony between groups and the lessons all of us, especially those governing the country, need to imbibe from the Emergency. Unless we, as a nation, introspect on where we are headed, we will be left ruefully contemplating the words of the Spanish-American philosopher George Santayana “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”

16 Jun

Respecting the Opposition (and the Constitution)

Posted by vramani in government, public affairs. Tagged: .

In a rather unusual disclosure amidst the flurry of scripted TV channel interviews he gave during the 2024 Lok Sabha election season, the Prime Minister claimed he respected the opposition; in fact, he bemoaned the absence of a strong opposition. He further went on to say that the opposition had been of no use to him and that they were so full of negativity, opposing decisions in the country’s interest for political benefit. In a parliamentary democracy, the very concept of political parties in opposition being useful to the ruling party is antithetical. It is the democratic responsibility, nay, democratic duty of the political opposition to question the government at every turn and criticise actions it feels are violating constitutional propriety or the rule of law.

While India has seen a complete breakdown of consensus between the government and opposition political parties over the last five years, this debate needs to be widened to clarify the term “opposition” as also to examine why respect for the “opposition” is critical to a functioning democracy and what those holding the reins of government need to do to demonstrate that they really respect the “opposition”. Based on my three decade-long experience at various levels of governance, I give below eight guidelines to a healthy, vibrant (even if raucous at times), functional democracy and how these have been repeatedly breached in recent years.

  1. Opposition is a far broader term than just political opposition

Political parties that sit on opposition benches in legislatures are, of course, the opposition (in the narrow sense). But there is also a wider universe of opposing ideologies and views. These include different stakeholders in a democracy — farmers, industrial workers, the salaried middle class, media, academia, entrepreneurs and businesspersons, to name just a few. It is very likely that a government will be able to satisfy the demands of any one group only to a limited extent. That is why consensus in policy making is stressed: while certain priorities may receive greater attention, those whose demands are not satisfied should, after due consultation and dialogue, receive rational explanations as to why their demands may have to be deferred to a later date.

  1. Adopt a collegial system of governance

In a feudal political environment where the top honcho calls all the shots, consultation, dialogue and debate are conspicuous by their absence. The past decade has seen a worsening of this trend of unilateral decision making, both at the centre and in the states. Cabinet meetings become a formality, with Ministers rarely giving their opinions on issues, let alone openly voicing dissent. Parliament has been reduced to a pale shadow of its former self: contrast proceedings in recent years with the vibrant debates of the 1950s. A disturbing feature has been the failure of the Leader of the House, the Prime Minister, to participate regularly in debates in the two Houses of Parliament. The strife in Manipur, caused in large part by executive inaction, has received little attention in the Lok/Rajya Sabhas and has seen no statement by the Prime Minister to date. Demonetisation, Article 370 abrogation, the Citizenship Amendment Act, the Farm Laws and the COVID pandemic are glaring examples of executive actions undertaken without the legislature being consulted. Standing Committees of the different Ministries have been rendered insignificant; important legislation with far-reaching implications for the right to liberty of citizens, like the UAPA and PMLA amendments and the new criminal laws, would have benefited from examination by select committees comprising members of both Houses of Parliament. The nadir was reached in the last winter session of the last Parliament, when important legislation was passed in the absence of 146 opposition members of both Houses, who were suspended after acrimonious exchanges with the Presiding Officers of both Houses, on not being allowed to raise issues of national importance.

  1. Accept dissent gracefully and give full space for freedom of expression

Given that, in a parliamentary democracy, the ruling party generally secures around 40% of the vote, there is always going to be a sizeable segment of the population that is critical of the policies and actions of the government of the day. Intolerance of dissenting opinions is evident when terms like “anti-national” and “urban Naxal” are freely employed against those with different points of view. Withdrawal of FCRA registration and 80G income tax exemptions are tools used to block NGOs that question government policies impacting human rights and the environment. A disturbing feature over the past decade has been the frequent use of sedition provisions and other draconian laws against those who are only asserting their right to freedom of expression and to stand up for the marginalised and underprivileged sections of society. The use (misuse?) of legislation that inhibits the judiciary from granting bail has been a powerful weapon in the hands of the executive. Activists and dissenters languish in jail for years without trial: the Bhima Koregaon and Delhi riots cases are only the most glaring instances. Selective implementation of the criminal law provisions relating to defamation and promoting enmity between communities have been widely employed to suppress criticism of executive actions and policies. Governments need to take to heart the wise words of Sant Kabir:

निंदक नियरे राखिए ऑंगन कुटी छवाय,

बिन पानी, साबुन बिना, निर्मल करे सुभाय ।

Heeding the words of critics keeps governments from taking wrong steps. Else, the people will respond appropriately at the time of elections, as the Lok Sabha elections of 1977 and 2024 and numerous legislative assembly elections have demonstrated.

  1. Respect institutional independence

A major casualty over the past few decades has been the steady erosion of independence of institutions mandated by the Constitution of India. The Supreme Court may have scuppered the establishment of the NJAC in 2015, but the executive has adroitly used delaying tactics to stall the appointment of judges to the Supreme Court and High Courts who are perceived to be independent in their approach. The inordinate delays in hearing crucial cases like the electoral bonds, Article 370 abrogation and CAA, as well as judgments which limit personal liberties of citizens have tended to erode public confidence in the judicial system. The lukewarm approach to grant of bail has emboldened investigative agencies to undertake search and seizure operations even in minor cases involving activists, media persons and dissenters: the provisions of draconian laws like the UAPA and PMLA ensure that the process becomes the punishment, with frequent arrests and long periods of incarceration without trial, given that “jail, not bail” seems to be the new jurisprudence.

The administrative executive (the civil services and the police) have often deviated from the golden words of Sardar Patel, when he spoke to the first batch of IAS probationers on 21 April 1947: “I would advise you to maintain the utmost impartiality and incorruptibility of administration. A civil servant cannot afford to, and must not, take part in politics…I hope that you would…render your service without fear or favour and without any expectation of extraneous rewards.” Political interference in appointments, postings and transfers has become a flourishing industry. Police reforms as mandated in the 2006 Supreme Court directions in the Prakash Singh judgment are honoured more in the breach: as for wider reforms in the civil services, perish the thought.

The Election Commission of India has, especially in recent months, come in for severe criticism for its flip flops on electoral bonds and timely publication of votes polled. In the recent Lok Sabha elections, it can be faulted on three other issues as well: (i) It could have frozen the use of proceeds of electoral bonds, declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court in February 2024, using its powers under Article 324 of the Constitution of India; (ii) It looked the other way when prominent politicians were arrested and opposition political parties were harassed by investigative agencies after the enforcement of the Model Code of Conduct (MCC); (iii) It took no action against various political functionaries for vituperative speeches that demonised a minority community.

Nor has the office of the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) covered itself with glory with its performance in the last seven years. A body that brought out a plethora of reports in the pre-2014 era, with inspired leaks to the media, has severely curtailed the issue of reports covering audits of Ministries/PSUs in subsequent years, noticeable reticence being obvious in the Rafale and demonetisation cases.

The mainstream print and electronic media has abdicated its role as the Fourth Estate. Barring a clutch of online news media and social media channels, the corporate-run media outlets have functioned as fawning spokespersons for the ruling dispensation.

  1. Stop using investigative agencies to settle political scores and gain political advantage

The “caged parrot”, as the CBI was disparagingly referred to by the Supreme Court, has now been reinforced by “formidable falcons” — the ED, NIA, NCB, Delhi Police and the Income Tax department. All these agencies do have a crucial role to play in checking terrorism and crimes, including economic offences. The problem arises when they flex their muscles against political opponents of the ruling party around election time and, increasingly, in the interregnum between elections, to sway legislator loyalty in favour of the ruling party. Lure of office is definitely a major influence on legislators, but the promptness with which investigations are launched at moments of crucial political developments are definite pointers to pressures being put, especially when cases are miraculously dropped after months and years of investigations the moment the politicos concerned throw in their lot with the ruling party. The concept of a level playing field at election time has been severely compromised during the latest Lok Sabha elections by the arrests of prominent politicians and other executive actions by investigative agencies at a time when the MCC was in force.

  1. Stop “othering” communities and groups

A polyglot, multicultural country thrives on the joyous acceptance of different customs and traditions and the celebration of diversity. The past many years have seen shrill campaigns directed at the Muslim community, with abysmal depths being reached during the appalling election campaign focused on “infiltrators”, “vote jihad” and “appeasement”. State policy in states governed by the BJP has been directed at specific freedoms of the minority communities — food, religion, marriage and even dress. In the name of reasonable restrictions, fundamental rights of association under Article 19 of the Constitution of India (that includes with the opposite sex) and Article 25 (freedom to propagate religion) are being infringed upon through legislative measures pushed through without consultation with the affected stakeholders. Hate speech against the Muslim community attracts little attention from most governments and their police forces, and religious processions are used as a method to provoke the Muslim community. The bulldozer raj in Uttar Pradesh and a number of other BJP-ruled states, with scant regard for due process of law, has spread terror of arbitrary state action among dissenters and the Muslim community.

  1. Promote genuine federalism

Probably no aspect has been as severely impacted in recent years as the federal structure of India. Governors have always been handy tools in the hands of the party ruling at the centre ever since the days of Indira Gandhi. This breakdown of trust between Governors and opposition State Governments has assumed epidemic proportions today. Governors reserve to themselves the right to sit on bills sent to them for assent after passage by the legislature, a practice deplored by the Supreme Court. State governments also have major grievances about the tardy release of funds rightfully due to them from the centre, which also curtailed states’ powers to tax and borrow from the market. Subjects were moved from the State list to the Concurrent list, so that the scope for central interference increases. A move to give the Central government powers to move All India Service officers from the states to the Government of India without state government concurrence was aborted only after stiff opposition from state governments. The devaluation of the Inter State Council right from the days of Congress governments has resulted in the absence of an effective forum for centre-state discussion and dialogue.

  1. Observe decency and civility in public life

While there has been a steady coarsening of discourse within Parliament and in society over the past couple of decades, the rise of social media since 2014 and the rabidly partisan approach of a number of television channels has poisoned the social and political environment in recent times. The root of this degeneration probably lies in elections being treated as the end rather than as a means to an end. The recent Lok Sabha elections saw speeches descend to levels that would shame any decent society. The blatant use (and misuse) of platforms like Facebook, WhatsApp and X (formerly Twitter) to spread fake news and indulge in slander and innuendo has sown the seeds of bitterness between  political parties and, more dangerously, between communities.

Gresham’s Law has operated in Indian political and social life, with the basest tendencies driving out the basic human values of tolerance and kindness. Let us be clear: this sickness affects the body politic across the political spectrum. Autocratic, anti-democratic behaviour can be observed in a wide range of political leaders, starting with the way they run their parties, translating eventually into authoritarian governance. Institutional subservience supports such behaviour. The integrity and impartiality of the civil services and the police have long been compromised by the lure of plum postings while in service and comfortable sinecures after retirement. This tendency has, unfortunately, percolated to the armed forces and the judiciary as well. The public perception of the impartiality of government auditors, regulators and other constitutional bodies charged with maintaining checks and balance on the executive has suffered serious erosion over the years. Respect is given when it is earned through one’s actions. Only if the latest election results lead to introspection on their watchdog roles among various constitutional bodies, the media and the permanent executive can democracy hope to flourish in India. As Rabindranath Tagore has said “Into that heaven of freedom, my Father, let my country awake.”

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2 Jun

The Topsy-Turvy World of the 2024 Lok Sabha Elections

Posted by vramani in elections. Tagged: , , .

I have witnessed, conducted and supervised Lok Sabha (LS), legislative assembly and municipal corporation elections over the past fifty years. Who can forget the 1977 LS elections, which unseated the Congress party for the first time after independence? The 1989 LS elections, which ejected the Congress from power a second time. The 1991 LS election, which witnessed the unfortunate spectacle of the assassination of a former Prime Minister. And the 2004 and 2014 LS elections, which ushered the incumbent governments out of power. But my vote for the most unusual election would undoubtedly be the 2024 LS elections.

The present election has been characterised by twists and turns never seen before in the annals of India’s election history. The precursor to the drama was the Supreme Court judgment of 15 February 2024 holding the issue of electoral bonds to be unconstitutional. After much huffing and puffing, the State Bank of India disgorged information on who gave how much money and who got the money (the two being pieced together by intrepid media and civil society investigators). Next, before the announcement of elections, came the unexpected resignation of Election Commissioner Arun Goel. With the resignation of former Election Commissioner Ashok Lavasa still fresh in people’s minds, the rumour mills started working overtime. The rushed through appointment of two new Election Commissioners, probably to meet the deadline of announcement of Lok Sabha elections, attracted criticism, especially since new legislation negated an earlier Supreme Court decision and gave the Government of India a decisive say in appointment of the top honchos of the ECI.

The third Act in the ongoing drama featured the arrests of Arvind Kejriwal and K. Kavitha in the Delhi liquor policy case after the declaration of LS elections and the enforcement of the Model Code of Conduct (MCC). Taken in conjunction with the previous incarceration of former Jharkhand CM Hemant Soren and the over year-long custody of former Delhi Deputy CM Manish Sisodia, the March-April arrests effectively prevented a number of opposition politicians from campaigning. There was also the sudden enthusiasm of the Income Tax Department to freeze the accounts of the Congress and some other opposition parties for apparent tax infractions: how these came up for action only at election time is a crore-rupee question.

As if there had not been enough drama already, the top guns of the BJP added more masala to the khichdi. Led by no less a person than the Prime Minister, the ruling party campaigners made mutton, machli, mangalsutra, mujra, Mandir and Muslim their key points of reference, not to forget manifesto (the Congress’s, of course). The resulting furore saw some backtracking from the Prime Minister, who affirmed his resolve not “to do Hindu-Muslim”. The problem here lies in the public perception that acts of his party’s governments in various states, whether of commission (anti-beef laws, religious conversion statutes, dress codes, bulldozer raj) or omission (blithely ignoring hate speech, giving latitude to vigilante groups taking the law into their own hands), have deepened already existing fissures between the two largest religious communities in India. The least one would have expected from responsible public figures would have been a focus on issues like jobs, health care and education rather than diatribes on appeasement of “minority groups” and an almost obsessive focus on India’s largest minority community.

But what raised many eyebrows, especially of veteran politicians and administrators of electoral battles of the past, was the ostrich-like attitude of the Election Commission of India (ECI) in the strict enforcement of the MCC. For probably the first time, notices were issued by the ECI to the two major political parties for violations of the Model Code of Conduct by their star campaigners, rather than questioning these campaigners in person. After cogitating on the issue for 23 days, by which time the bulk of campaigning had already been completed, the ECI delivered a homily to the two national parties on how their members, especially senior leaders, should maintain norms in their utterances. Such pusillanimity in firmly enforcing the MCC led to an atmosphere of impunity, with unsubstantiated charges and slurs continuing to be hurled, without discipline being enforced on the major speakers, including the Prime Minister. Little wonder then that the mild-mannered former Prime Minister Dr. Manmohan Singh, has, at the fag end of the election season,  seen fit to strongly admonish his successor.

The MCC in respect of the media causes even more concern. The partisan electronic media has made its party affiliations clear even earlier, these continuing in the election season. Inordinate time space was given to interviews with ruling party functionaries and news attention was lavished on election meetings and roadshows of BJP bigwigs, especially the Prime Minister. What is more troubling is the gross misuse of social media to mislead the public and influence voting patterns. Reports show how major platforms like Meta and Google have been used by third-party advertisers to post communal and derogatory messages to the population: there is no provision for regulation of such content in the MCC. WhatsApp groups are subject to no MCC and can transmit messages (including incendiary ones) round the clock. The ECI clearly needs to confront the use (and abuse) of technology in elections in the coming months and years.

The ECI was fortunate in being let off the hook in the Supreme Court cases of both the EVM-VVPAT and the timely publication of constituency-wise total voting figures. It has steadfastly refused to engage over the past five years with experts from civil society organisations to resolve the issue of the number of VVPAT slips that ought to be counted to reassure the public that EVMs are accurately recording votes as actually cast. Instead of following sound statistical sampling methods, the ECI has stuck to the 2019 Supreme Court formula of counting slips from 5 VVPATs in each assembly constituency, without specifying what would be the next step in the event of a discrepancy between the EVM and VVPAT count. During the current elections, the ECI took an inordinately long time in releasing the votes polled in each parliamentary constituency; when it did make this information public, it gave percentages rather than actual numbers. This led to the unusual situation of parties approaching the Supreme Court to direct the ECI to furnish constituency-wise numbers of votes polled. After affirming before the court that it was not required to publish figures of constituency-wise polling figures (based on Form 17C), the ECI, in a sudden volte face, provided constituency-wise polling figures for each constituency the first six  rounds of polling. Its sudden, prompt ability to produce figures it had said would take time to collate hardly boosted the credibility of the ECI, already under the civil society scanner for its approach to the EVM-VVPAT issue. Matters were not helped by its public outburst against the Congress party for drawing attention of its allies to the issue of votes polled.

Sideshows also seemed to feature in this stranger than life election season. The grandson of a prominent Karnataka politician facing allegations of rape (said grandson also being a candidate in these elections) has raised the political temperature as has the alleged assault on an Aam Aadmi Party lady Rajya Sabha member on the premises of the Chief Minister’s residence in Delhi.

This topsy-turvy six-week long searing, bruising, bitter election campaign (strongly reminiscent of Alice in Wonderland) will cease by the end of May, but its echoes will reverberate well into the tenure of the next government. Doomsday prophets are already wondering what the outcome will be in the event of a hung Parliament. While I do not subscribe to extreme theories, I do wonder what the future holds in the event, belying exit poll predictions, the BJP falls short of the half-way mark or has just a narrow majority. Given the developments in recent times in states ranging from Arunachal Pradesh to Goa, Madhya Pradesh, Karnataka and Maharashtra, I would not be surprised if elected Lok Sabha members seek to make Faustian bargains motivated by daam and dand (saam and bhed having been rendered virtually irrelevant). If you don’t believe me, just trace the party-hopping in these elections, which would have made a Page 3 socialite proud. Truly, the just concluded IPL (Indian Premier League) may then make way for the higher stakes IPoL (Indian Political League). Should this happen, we can only write the epitaph of constitutional morality and moan the debasement of constitutional democracy echoing Cicero’s lament: O Tempora! O Mores!