An Ill-conceived Essay

COMMUNICATION

The article “Duragraha in the name of Satygraha: A Gandhian Perspective” by Alok Bajpai, published in the July 29 issue of Mainstream, is utterly misconceived. It itself seeks to kill the Gandhian spirit. By declaring the Parliament supreme, over the voice of the people’s movement supported by virtually all cross-sections of the society across the country, it forgot the Gandhian dictum that representational democracy (which includes both parliamentary and presidential forms of democracy) is a sham, unless supported by the pillars of participatory democracy. Only when gram sabhas are recognised as the prime legislature for each village, and the legislatures for larger geographical terrains are constituted by electees voted by the collegiums set up by the gram sabhas, can Parliament be truly representative and the sole authority to legislate on such contentions issues.

In our present state of parliamentary democracy, persons without any record of service to the people can get elected to legislatures, depending on the strength of party badges and money-power and/or muscle-power. That is why, in every general election, the percentage of legislators with criminal records has been steadily increasing.

The author’s statement that “the present movement of the Anna Team and others” is going to lead the country to “a political catas-trophe” has served as an apologia for those who are steeped in corruption. Events during the last week have proved that the movement has served as a wake-up call and struck fear in the hearts of those who have been indulging or acquiescing in corrupt practices. This movement has presented a grand opportunity to set up new, and to streamline the existing, check-and-balance institutions to ensure a system of clean administration at all levels.

I myself feel that Team Anna should also have focussed on the imperatives of (i) gram sabha as the prime legislature for the village; and (ii) the reversal of the existing paradigm of development in favour of decentralised political and economic powers, based on grassroot people’s participation in political decision-making and in steering economic activities with ecological sustainability. Without changes in these basics, eradication of corruption in all its forms is impossible. Team Anna’s Jan Lokpal Bill, if enacted, will be able to check only the blatant forms of corruption.

The Jan Lokpal Bill has rightly included the Prime Minister and judges within the ambit of the Lokpal panel’s watchfulness. As constitu-tional functionaries wielding vast powers over public life, they cannot be exempt from investi-gations by an independent body, if there are whispers against any of them. Looking the other way when a crime is being committed under one’s nose is also to be treated as a culpable offence.

Since the judiciary as an institution remains inviolate, there can be no question of compro-mising its independence. Rather, as its aftermath, the majesty of the Courts, cleansed of all shadows, will rise to a new height and the clean judges will come to enjoy much greater respect. While nobody will question what a MP says in Parliament, the buying of MPs’ votes, as happened during P.V. Narasimha Rao’s premiership or on the eve of passage of the Indo-US nuclear deal, must come under the Lokpal’s scanner. Since the CBI has, on very many occasions, allowed itself to be used as an instrument in the hands of the ruling politicians, it, too, must come under the Lokpal’s overseeing. But Aruna Roy’s point is valid: “One Lokpal panel should focus only on the big-ticket corruption cases involving Ministers and senior officers.” Too much load on one panel would make it ineffective.

But the question of questions is: will there be only one Lokpal panel or several, distributed over functional spheres and geographic zones? And how will they be chosen? The usual procedure of the Prime Minister, the Leader of the Opposition and one Supreme Court judge jointly making the choice will be inadequate in this case. Approval for the Lokpal panel must come from a wider base. Similarly, the appointment of the Lok Ayukta at the State level must have approval from both the Assembly and the Legislatives Council, if the latter exists.

Sailendra Nath Ghosh

77, Manavsthali Apartments, Vasundhara Enclave, Delhi-110096

e-mail: sailendranathghosh@yahoo.com

sailendranathg@gmail.com and

sailendranathghosh.blogspot.com