Mr. Yeshwant Sinha! Please practice before you preach...

The BJP when it is out of power resorts to tactics of ransom and preaching. They wisely forget their past. Yeshwant Sinha, the Finance Minister during the NDA regime could do nothing better on the financial front and is now advising the ruling government that he will help in controlling price rise within two months. Is he going to spray a magical trick or resort to tricks of ‘Babas’? Yeshwant Sinha, please recollect what good have you done during your tenure as Finance Minister for the common man in regards to policies, corruption and food grains. Here is a gist…In its drive for all-out globalisation and liberalisation, the NDA government even surpassed the Rao-Manmohan duo of the Congress. Under the NDA government the GDP growth rate came down from 6.2% in 1996-97 to an average of around 5% in 1999-2003. The industrial growth rate came down from 11.7% in 1996-97 to 5% in 2000-01. Under the NDA government the public investment came down from 11.7% in 1985-86 to 6.3% in 2002-03.

The industrial growth rate came down from 11.7% in 1996-97 to 5% in 2000-01. Under the NDA government the public investment came down from 11.7% in 1985-86 to 6.3% in 2002-03.The NDA government completely liberalised the import of consumer goods over the three import-export policies it presented from 1998-99 onwards, Unemployment tremendously increased during the NDA period. Growth rate of employment in the country fell drastically during the NDA government period. Employment in the organised sector fell from 28.11 million in 1999 to 27.96 million in 2000. The number of unemployed persons had gone up from about 75 lakh in 1993-94 to 90 lakh in 1999-2000. As per the information collected through Employment Market Information Programme of Directorate General of Employment & Training, the average growth rate of employment in public sector had come down to around 0.15% per annum during 1991-2000 from 2.08% per annum during 1983-89.

According to Economic Survey 2001-02, 5192 sick industrial units were registered under BIFR including 4930 private sector units and 95 Central PSUs and 167 State PSUs. Data from the National Sample Survey (NSS) of households suggest that the proportion of people below the poverty line has remained more or less unchanged around 36 per cent in the 1990s. The NDA government meekly surrendered to the demands of developed imperialist countries at the WTO and signed the treaty. The NDA government had proposed labour law changes against the interests of the working class. The NDA government appointed a Second Labour Commission without proper workers’ representatives on that and with anti-worker terms of reference to amend labour laws according to the needs of globalisation. It accepted the anti-labour recommendations of the Second Labour Commission. The Vajpayee government declared a war against the workers in its 2001-02 budget proposing amendment to Section V-B of the Industrial Disputes Act to allow industrial units with up to 1000 workers to close down without government permission and to Section 10 of the Contract Labour Act to legalise the contract labour system. The government also amended the Trade Union Act of 1926.

The Centre deployed the army against the striking power sector workers on the request of the UP government. The Centre deployed navy personnel against the striking port and dock. Workers. The NDA government proposed to restructure ESI and Pension schemes. The number of man days lost due to lockouts was almost four times than the number of man days lost due to strikes in 2001. The Union budget 2001-02 announced the decision to cut government staff strength by 10% in five years. That meant a loss of 66,000 jobs per year. The Vajpayee government started privatisation of even profit-making PSUs. Despite a powerful resistance by BALCO workers the company was handed over to Sterlite Industries for a song.

The NDA government refused to fix mandatory floor-level minimum wage at the Centre. The rate of unemployment increased from about 6 per cent in 1993-94 to 7.3 per cent in 1999-2000.
The NDA government did not pass a comprehensive legislation for agricultural labourers but clubbed agricultural labour within the Unorganised Sector Workers Bill. Under objection from the Finance Ministry, the Unorganised Labour Bill was also shelved. Labour Minister Sahib Singh Verma announced on November 7, 2003, a five-year waiver for units in special economic zones from contribution to the Employees Provident Fund and the Employees State Insurance Scheme. Verma also said the government had also decided in principle to allow fixed-term labour contracts in other areas of the economy. This led to pushing farmers to commit suicide and poor peasants, plantation and urban labourers to die of starvation. The policies of the NDA government under the garb of so-called "second generation reforms" had led to an acute rural crisis in India resulting in the twin tragedies of farmers’ suicides and starvation deaths.

The NDA government attempted to disband state procurement of food grains. The food grains in the FCI godowns were rotting but it was neither being distributed through PDS nor given to the poor through food for work schemes. PDS prices of food grains were repeatedly increased by the Vajpayee government. The prices of PDS food grains, fertilisers, kerosene and LPG had also been increased by the Vajpayee government. The governemnt has cut subsidies on fertilisers, pesticides, irrigation, power and all other inputs making agrarian production costlier.
  

BJP, to be different, it has to shun the love of power

The parliamentarians seem to be shameless and spineless creatures. Even Kindergarten children seem to have more discipline than these scoundrels. Why do they frequently stall the parliament and hold the nation to ransom? Why not debate and work out solutions in a disciplined and dignified manner instead of only playing the blame game and tricks of toppling the government? In this game nothing will materialize, as both will stick to their guns and the ultimate loser is the ‘aam admi’. The washed out winter session of parliament, stalled daily for 22 consecutive days due to opposition protests and adjournments, had translated into a loss of a staggering over Rs.171 crore to the nation. The amount if worked out with the expenditure for each day of a session calculates at an astronomical Rs.7.8 crore. Never before in the history of the Indian Parliament has a complete session been washed out without transacting any business. This is violative of all rules of business and ethics, it is rather criminal. Even question hour and private members’ business have been made a casualty. Shame on our democracy!

Regarding, BJP’s stand of stalling Parliament on the issue of price rise, it is an accepted fact that this phenomenon is a global issue. The global economy is in a crisis. And things are only going to get worse. Inflation is one of the manifestations of the global crisis, and arises from changes in the relationship between the volume of commodities and of money in the economy. A characteristic feature of international inflation is its global character. It affects all countries to one extent or another, lowering the buying power of all monetary units to varying degrees. At present, the fastest price rises are for goods of primary necessity that are constantly consumed - food and fuel. Presently, world economic crisis is at a precarious stage, manifesting itself primarily in the area of finance (destabilisation of stock markets, bank losses, growing inflation, and rising interest rates); the crisis will affect all countries that are part of the world economy, and will usher in a prolonged depression. The global economic de-stabilisation will have enormously destructive consequences. The crisis has seen a recession in the US and the beginning of an industrial downturn in other countries. Instead of BJP holding the nation to hostage, why they not give any suggestions to curb or control price rise? It is a constitutional duty of the opposition to play a helping hand in the progress of the nation instead of destabilizing the functioning of government.

On the second issue where the BJP has been training its guns on government, is their theory on intelligence failure of terror strike on Mumbai. However, it is strange for BJP to attack the government on terrorism and government failure. In fact, they should not forget that BJP during its rule had brought the terrorists right inside the Parliament. Further terrorism took its roots in the country only after L.K.Advani rath yatra and demolition of Babri Masjid. Thereafter, terrorist attacks on the country have been at regular intervals. All this goes on while recorded evidence shows that Advani led the symbolic religious caravan (rath yatra) across the country, which left behind a trail of anti-Muslims riots killing over 3000 Muslims and burning and looting their properties in many states. The BJP people have grossly misused their platform to air their biases, misinformation and lies. In government they have tried to change the secular outlook of the State. Of course, Advani and others who cons pirated the demolition are both criminals and mass murderers on a colossal scale. While Advani masterminded the Babri Masjid demolition and arranged for the subsequent mass murder of thousands of Muslims across the country he himself played a major role.

Later, the decision of the Vajpayee government to release three dreaded terrorists including Jaish-e-Mohammad (JeM) chief Masood Azhar in December, 1999 received a lot of flak from various political parties, more so because the then external affairs minister Jaswant Singh accompanied them (terrorists) to Kandahar. Azhar’s name had subsequently figured in the December 2001 terror attack on Parliament and the attack outside Jammu and Kashmir Assembly in Srinagar in the same month.  As a nation we do not have the guts to stand up to terrorism. We cannot take hits and suffer casualties. We start counting our dead even before a battle has been won or lost. We make a great show of honouring those who die on the battlefield and lionise brave hearts of history. We are, if truth be told, a nation of cowards who don’t have the courage to admit one’s weakness but are happy to blame others.  Nearly, after a decade after the incident, many people still hold the BJP-led NDA Government responsible for the ‘shameful’ denouement.

Lastly, just 24 hours after 3 blasts ripped through Mumbai, Congress and BJP had locked horns. With the BJP blaming the government policy on terror, saying vote bank politics had weakened the fight against terror, the government asked the Opposition to stop the petty politics. The BJP besides playing the blame game and accusing has nothing fruitful to offer to the nation. Terrorists strikes have been a regular affair and BJP-NDA during their rule had done nothing to stop them and now they are proudly preaching. It is not that we have not witnessed the acts of terror before. Starting from attack on Parliament, Ansal Plaza, Akshrdham temple, Raghunath Temple in Jammu; during NDA regime to blasts in Malegaon, Samjhauta express, Nanded, Jalna , Parbhani, attack on RSS headquarters in Nagpur and Chennai, killing of two Bajrang Dal workers in Nanded while making bombs, Hyderabad blasts and Jaipur one's the country has suffered enormously during the past decade.

Finally, the BJP always claimed itself to be a party with a difference but in practice it appears no different. Now, it’s high time it shuns its gimmicks and goes on the job of constitutional politics and shy aside the blame game. To be different, it has to shun the love of power. And to project itself as ‘a party with a difference’, it will have to put certain ideals ahead of power.

Should the success of Anna Hazares fast be interpreted as the Rise of Fascism in India and Ring alarm bells for Democracy?

What Anna Hazare and Baba Ramdev are trying to achieve with their protest is, in the long run, very harmful for the country. Protesting against corruption in itself is, of course, not wrong and should even be encouraged, but what they are trying to do is influence the working of a democratically-elected government and the due process of law-making by what is essentially blackmail. The constitution of this country clearly lays down a number of safeguards, processes and institutions that are designed to deal with all these issues. If someone has a problem with corruption, there is process to report to the police or file a PIL. Or better still, don’t elect them!
Violating the due process to achieve a goal — and this is admittedly a noble goal — is adding to the problem. It sows the seeds of anarchy. This is trial by the media and trial by a kangaroo court. Who are Anna Hazare, Baba Ramdev or his followers to decide what should or should not be included in the Lokpal Bill? Leave it to Parliament. That’s what you elected them for. Our government is our government. We put them there, and often enough have booted them out every five years if we don’t like them.
Allowing extra-constitutional measures to be used to influence the process of lawmaking sets a dangerous precedent. Today, it’s taking on corruption. How do we know that tomorrow it won’t be used to push some other majority agenda like a fast for constructing Ram temple at Ayodhya; pressurising government to wage a war against Pakistan to resolve Kashmir issue and many more.If the whole bunch of Hindu wings - Shiv Sena, RSS, VHP, Bajrang Dal etc throw their weight behind them. Then what?
India’s main strength lies in its ability to have maintained democracy for 63 years while all others who became independent around the same time have failed. The wellspring of the Indian democracy has been the strength of its Constitution and institutions. These are above all issues and above all people. They’re not perfect by any means but need to be upheld to ensure that every issue goes through the same due process. That is democracy. If Anna Hazare or Ramdev have a problem, and do not want to use the courts, then let them deal with them in the ultimate manifestation of public opinion — the ballot box.
Sometimes a sense of unbridled virtue can also subvert democracy. The agitation by civil society activists over the Jan Lokpal Bill is a reminder of this uncomfortable truth. There is a great deal of justified consternation over corruption. The obduracy of the political leadership is testing the patience of citizens. But the movement behind the Jan Lokpal Bill is crossing the lines of reasonableness. It is premised on an institutional imagination that is at best naïve; at worst subversive of representative democracy.
The morality of fasting unto death for a political cause in a constitutional democracy has always been a tricky issue. There is something deeply coercive about fasting unto death. When it is tied to an unparalleled moral eminence, as it is in the case of Anna Hazare or Ramdev, it amounts to blackmail. There may be circumstances, where the tyranny of government is so oppressive, or the moral cause at stake so vital that some such method of protest is called for. But in a functioning constitutional democracy, not having one’s preferred institutional solution to a problem accepted, does not constitute a sufficient reason for the exercise of such coercive moral power. This is not the place to debate when a fast-unto-death is appropriate. But B.R. Ambedkar was surely right, in one of his greatest speeches, to warn that recourse to such methods was opening up a democracy to the “grammar of anarchy”.
If you don’t trust Parliamentary democracy and do not want to participate in the processes, it has in place for people’s participation or even think through ways to reform the system to make it more responsive, what exactly is your alternative? Even with all the corruption within the present system, I would take it over a coercive and totalitarian movement such as Anna Hazare’s where he and his bunch of civil society activists are trying to thrust their version of a Bill down people’s throat through blackmail. The movement is spurious because it misleads people into thinking that it is a fight against corruption when it is basically only a fight to get 5 people’s version of a Bill enacted through coercion. If it was actually a fight against corruption, then where is their blueprint to reform other laws related to corruption, bring in more economic reforms that would take away the government’s discretionary powers and such other matters. It’s clear that this is nothing but a power trip for the activists who do not represent anybody but themselves, but want the power of a elected representative without ever winning or having the capability to win an election. If it were not so, there would have been other civil society activists on the Joint Committee who may not necessarily be supporters of Anna Hazare’s bill but have other ideas of their own.
There is more harm done by so-called “morally upright” people than the ones who do not claim moral uprightness! I have not voted for Anna Hazare or Ramdev, so I do not view him as my representative by any standards. I do not believe in his ideology nor do I support his blackmailing tactics. If he wants to represent people, he better do it through legitimate means ie election. In a democracy, that is the only legitimate means of deciding who is a people’s representative. If he thinks he cannot win an election (as he has said), but wants to enforce his point of view by force, then he wants to wield power to which he is not entitled! It is not the task of a civil society actitvist to draft a Bill. Drafting and debating bills is the primary task of an MP (that’s why he is called a legislator). Civil society can legitimately give its opinions through various points of engagement such as when standing committees invite comments or ministries invite comments for draft bills.
Corruption is a challenge. And public agitation is required to shame government. But it is possible to maintain, in reasonable good faith, that the Jan Lokpal Bill is not necessarily the best, or the only solution to the corruption challenge. The various drafts of the Jan Lokpal Bill are, very frankly, an institutional nightmare. They amount to an unparalleled concentration of power in one institution that will literally be able to summon any institution and command any kind of police, judicial and investigative power. Power, divided in a democracy, can often be alibi for evading responsibility. But it is also a guarantee that the system is not at the mercy of a few good men. Having concentrated immense power, it then displays extraordinary faith in the virtue of those who will wield this power. Why do we think this institution will be incorruptible?
But the demand is premised on an idea that non-elected institutions that do not involve politicians are somehow the only ones that can be trusted. This assumption is false. Institutions of all kinds have succeeded and failed. But the premise of so much accountability discourse is not just contempt of politicians, but contempt of representative democracy. This contempt is reflected in two ways. There are several mechanisms of accountability in place. They have not worked as well as they should; vested interests have subverted them. But interestingly, despite those interests, governments are being called to account. Most of us are as aghast as any of the agitators about the evasions of government. But it does not follow that creating a draconian new institution that diminishes everything from the Prime Minister’s Office to the Supreme Court is a solution. The net result of a “Lokpal” will be to weaken the authority of even other well-functioning institutions. No agitation focuses on sensible, manageable reform of representative institutions; all agitative energies are premised on bypassing them. Perhaps some version of a Lokpal is desirable but deferring to new institutions at the top of the food chain without attending to basics amounts to trying ‘B’ if ‘A’ does not work, is absurd. We should, as citizens, not be subject to the moral coercion of a fast-unto-death on this issue.
But the claim that the “people” are not represented by elected representatives, but are represented by their self-appointed guardians is disturbing. In a democracy, one ought to freely express views. But anyone who claims to be the “authentic” voice of the people is treading on very thin ice indeed. It is a form of Jacobinism that is intoxicated with its own certainties about the people. It is not willing to subject itself to an accountability, least of all to the only mechanism we know of designating representatives: elections. The demand that a Jan Lokpal Bill be drafted jointly by the government and a self-appointed committee of public virtue is absurd. Most of us sharply disagree with elected government on matters even more important than corruption. But no matter how cogent our arguments, it does not give us the right to say that our virtue entitles us to dictate policy to a representative process. In an age of cynicism, Anna Hazare is a colossus of idealism. It is a dangerous illusion to pedal that badly designed new institutions will be a magic wand to remove corruption. All they will do is promote wishful thinking and distract from the myriads of prosaic decisions that will be required to get a better politics.
The nation is energized about Anna Hazare’s fast and Ramdev’s following. But no party is raising a fundamental question. What is the necessity of post or institution called Lokpal? The question can be debated on two levels. First, there is no guarantee that corruption at the top echelons of government will decrease by the appointment of Lokpal. The appointment of Lokayuktas at state levels indicates to the same. But this is minor or superficial level. The main question lies much deeper. Why should there be any need of institutions like Lokayuktas or Lokpals? Whosoever is corrupt should be punished legally. There are laws to prevent corruption. The laws should be applied properly. The responsibility for judging corruption lies with the judicial system. The administration’s responsibility is to investigate and collect necessary evidence for the trial. If the administration doesn’t perform its duty properly, then the judicial system takes the responsibility to get the task done properly. But the crux is-everyone performs the duty which is delegated to him.
Herein lays the logical and fundamental irrelevance of posts like Lokpal or Lokayukta. Why should any other institution carry out the duty of the court? The court itself should get active to implement the prevailing anti-corruption laws to prevent corruption at the top levels of government. The judiciary can recommend creation of stringent laws if necessary. But it is meaningless to create a parallel judicial system for that purpose. That is why in matured democracies of developed countries this kind of parallel institution is a rarity. Two different judicial systems create unnecessary confusion, which can invite major complications in the judicial process. Simultaneously, it is harmful to the dignity of the court. In our country the tendency to create multiple posts or institutions for a single purpose is ancient, well-known, and practically omnipresent. This is a bad habit of Indian society and government. This habit leads to obesity of the government. Accumulation of excess fat is not an indicator of good health. Neither for a person, nor for a country.
But this is just one side of the story. The other side is also important. The presence of a separate judicial system for trial of corruption of high-ranking government officials violates one of the major fundamental rights of democracy. The right that all citizens are equal in eyes of law. If everyone is equal in the eyes of law, then why the corruption cases of government officials can’t be tried in the court where the ‘aam aadmi’ is being tried? Those involved in the movement for methodology for appointment of Lokpal and its legal complexities are not even raising this fundamental question. This indicates, this society is still incapable of understanding the nature of government of a mature, modern democracy. Indian democracy has a long way to go.
Corruption like many other problems is a symptom of poor governance. However as history shows us, in a democracy , these symptoms remain short lived in the long run. The indian republic was founded as a constitutional representative democracy. This is the very basis of India as a nation state , and this basis will never disappear in the long run. A social activist no matter how famous, is undermining the democratically elected government. This creates a precedent that self appointed guardians of our society have the right to browbeat our representative government. While their goal is laudable, their methods call in to question the very legitimacy of our constitution , and the precedent their fasts have set is very dangerous.
Also, the demand that an equal number of civil society activists be involved in the drafting of the Lok pal bill is again unacceptable. The fact is that self appointed citizens cannot hijack the constitutional process of legislation. No man, no matter how noble, can undermine an institution on which our country is democratized, in this case, parliament. The effect of Hazare’s demand is that he implies that he is superior to the institution of parliament.
As a country we need to realize , that corruption is a symptom of ineffective governance. The only way we can eradicate corruption is by concentrating on building our capacities at the rural level. Corruption has only one cure, and that is the principle of democratic accountability which is based on a premise that the voting public shall exercise a rational choice. As long as large swathes of our country are faced with the blight of illiteracy and poverty, voters will never exercise a rational choice. And the elite or the politicians of this country will know that irrespective of the number of scams or scandals they are implicated in, in the end, they only need to trick voters into electing them. If political parties can still hope to get votes by promising a populist handout of a color television, corruption will never leave this country.
Finally, Shouldn’t we stop and ask ourselves why it is that the government was so eager to accede to their hunger strikes, while there have been much more strident efforts for more horrifyingly basic issues of life, homestead and livelihood (I’m thinking of the hunger strikes by the NBA as well as of Irom Sharmila, but there are numerous other examples). Why is a government that has repeatedly proved its ability to simply force feed individuals and therefore stave off the unbearable result of a hunger strike, acceding to this fast even before it has rightly begun? Is it possible that the movement has been so extraordinarily successful because what it does is to reaffirm the current loci of power in its very attempt to counter them? Is this just that literal an example of what Walter Benjamin called law-making violence?