Has India's vote proved its utility?<\/p>\n
By G. S. Edwin<\/p>\n
JAKARTA (JP): A general election is statutorily required to be
\nheld in India once in five years. Held accordingly since 1951, it
\nhas upheld India as a committed practitioner of democracy. With
\nthe enormous increase in the number of voters (590 million),
\npolitical parties (155), and candidates (1300 in one
\nconstituency), the success achieved in conducting the election in
\na free and fair manner has been rightly hailed as a Napoleonic
\nfeat. But, sadly, the election is disappointingly seen as an
\nelaborate but empty ritual, and the celebrated and covetable
\nvote, disfunctional.<\/p>\n
When one assesses the success or otherwise of Indian
\ndemocracy, actually the vote is on trial. The question to be
\nasked is: The vote has value, but has it proved its utility? A
\nmotor car is, undoubtedly, an object of value, but it needs to
\nprove its utility. It cannot prove it in a swamp.<\/p>\n
Applying this acid test, the vote, 45 years of age, has not
\nproved its utility. Democracy in India has not succeeded (India's
\nper capita income is US$ 360 and Indonesia's, with a belated
\nstart but where the vote is kept focussed, $900 because the vote
\nhad no utility.<\/p>\n
India became a sovereign democratic republic in 1950. The
\nfirst general election was held in 1951 under universal
\nfranchise, empowerment of all through vote, and secret balloting.
\nTrust in the vote, novel and intoxicating, produced an euphoria.<\/p>\n
The euphoria had a quaint but a remarkable logic: Without the
\npower of vote to galvanize, the British, with a three-century fix
\non India, were chased out; with vote, the grass-root energizer,
\neverything could be chased out: poverty, backwardness, cast
\nsystems, and its genius for centrifugal stress and pull. In
\nshort, the vote promised a new India, a Westminster type
\ndemocracy, the ordained road to deliver it.<\/p>\n
The 1996 India, after nine elections, is certainly not a New
\nIndia. It is an India battered and worsened by the vote. Its
\nfailure, India limping and lagging, is too conspicuous and,
\nindeed, its fall-out, high political temperature and threat to
\nstability, too frightening to be missed or ignored. The vote,
\ninstead of taking off, has nose-dived.<\/p>\n
Strangely, the vote, so far, has not been condemned for its
\nfailure. It is exonerated and eulogized. A robust native wisdom
\nand maturity and an uncanny political perception are attributed
\nto it. According to fans -- barring extraordinary events such as
\nthe Gandhi assassinations, when the vote was blinded, at other
\ntimes, to its credit, it went forth and annihilated parties that
\nhad fallen in its esteem: the Congress party in 1977 and in 1996
\nand the regional parties like DMK in 1991 and ADMK in 1996 (The
\nADMK a party in Tamil Nadu won 186 seats in 1991, but only four
\nin 1996). However, it has not built a New India.<\/p>\n
The periodical slaughter has made the vote fearsome but not
\nconstructive. The trounced candidates were usually not buried.
\nThey came back, rested but unchastened and awaited their turn to
\nbe trounced again. This syndrome has impeded the system. The DMK
\nparty in Tamil Nadu won one seat in 1991. In 1996 it won 166
\nseats. Both these Tamil Nadu parties graphically illustrate how
\nsuccessfully the vote was always duped.<\/p>\n
From any reckoning there is no doubt, the vote has belied
\nexpectations. It is yet to find its feet or already rendered
\nimpotent. It needs help. Of late, this is recognized and some
\nremedial measures have been taken. Floor crossing, which sets
\naside the mandate of the vote for material gains, became
\nepidemic. This brought forth a law that prevents floor-crossing.
\nIt had restored stature to the vote.<\/p>\n
The strict enforcement of The Peoples' Representation Act, has
\ncompelled political parties to abide by certain norms and has
\nremoved the advantage enjoyed by political parties with money
\npower. The election-air is cleaner and lighter and the vote is
\nnow won in a fair manner.<\/p>\n
Requiring political parties to keep proper accounts, obtaining
\naudit certificates from public accountants and making it
\ncompulsory to disclose donations are under consideration. These
\nwill give respectability to political parties, and prevent vote-
\nbuying.<\/p>\n
These are steps in the right direction and have earned much
\napprobations. But clearly they are insufficient. Further steps
\nare necessary to convert vote-value to vote-utility.<\/p>\n
There is a clear need to limit the number of political
\nparties. India, by no stretch of the imagination, would need 155
\npolitical parties. Too many parties promote divisive politics and
\nmagnify the fault-lines of the Indian society. It is not healthy
\npluralism. Only the sense of national solidarity is destroyed and
\ngrowth of a community of interest is prevented. They confuse
\nchoice and militate against a party system of politics, as
\nunderstood, and needs to be practiced. In 1951 there were hardly
\nfour or five parties. Indonesia, a country territorially as
\nlarge, only with a lesser population, has only three parties.<\/p>\n
An average of 28 candidates to a constituency prevents a
\nsingle party emerging with the required numbers to gain respect
\nand form the government. A limit on the number of political
\nparties would automatically limit the number of candidates in
\neach constituency. As a corollary, independent candidature must
\nbe proscribed.<\/p>\n
Those who are defeated in an election should be allowed to
\ncontest only after a cooling period of five years. This would
\ngreatly enhance respect for the vote; as it will make performance
\na decisive criteria. Incidentally, the enforced sabbatical would
\nmake politics a diligent profession.<\/p>\n
Today the vote is deliberately and totally undermined by
\nirresponsible electioneering. What actually happens is: a
\npolitical party rides to power promising the moon, but once in
\npower, it doesn't even remember what it has promised and ditches
\nthe vote in the pit with impunity.<\/p>\n
The vote is angry; but what can it do? It has to wait for five
\nyears to avenge the betrayal, as it had done repeatedly to no
\navail. The vote, acting angrily had not engendered or promoted
\npolitical responsibility. Indeed, it has encouraged political
\ncynicism and adventurism. The Economist (April 27 - May 3) says
\n\"Indian politicians need not be ashamed of their democracy, only
\nof themselves\". This system fault must be corrected.<\/p>\n
As per the theory of Social Contract, it is a covenant that
\nbrings into existence the State (Government). Under a party
\nsystem of government, a victorious party, in effect, makes a new
\ncovenant with the vote, and a contract materializes. This would
\nmake it obligatory for the party to do what it promised it would
\ndo. If not, the party must be liable for breach of trust and
\nterms of contract. As this is not happening today, a law to
\nsecure this should be made. It will ensure that government is not
\ncaptured by puff and demagogy.<\/p>\n
History has proved: No vote, no politics, only dull obedience.
\nSo hope lies in vote and the freedom to exercise it, and the
\nchoice it has. Choice makes parties crucial. A limit to the
\nnumber of parties at once enhances the utility of the vote. The
\nthreat of a five-year sabbatical, for those who fail in an
\nelection and making the parties image-sensitive by holding them
\nliable for breach of trust would bring in the missing rectitude
\ninto the parties. The parties will find it necessary and
\nworthwhile to uphold value and compete fairly for the vote. In
\nshort, parties would have a level playing-field and be seen as
\nclear alternatives, not excess baggage or untreatable effluent.<\/p>\n
Under such a dispensation, not difficult to bring about,
\npolitics will be honorable and the vote will not be seen as a
\nblood-thirsty sovereign, but as having vitality and utility.<\/p>\n
Window: History has proved: No vote, no politics, only dull
\nobedience. So hope lies in vote and the freedom to exercise it,
\nand the choice it gives.<\/p>",
"url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/has-indias-vote-proved-its-utility-1447893297",
"image": ""
},
"sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
"sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}