Defying judicial prudence & law of natural justice

Dec 22. 2013

By: Ravi Sinha

Populism has swept the collective consciousness of the Indian masses in general and educated middle class in particular. Whatever is fancy and suits the wish list of middle class in the urban pockets is nowadays being advocated aloud without the cost-benefit analysis of the issue. This populism, or better to call it populist rhetoric, is writ large today in the power corridors, judiciary and media alike. When Congress Vice President Rahul Gandhi bluntly suggested to tear apart the ordinance of the Union Cabinet against debarring convicted law makers, he was seen to be taking a moral high ground. However, he was just responding to the populist rhetoric that was threatening to get the voices louder on the issue. 

Rahul Gandhi though had a reason to side with the populist rhetoric, as the main opposition party that did not contest the Ordinance or the Bill, rather just suggested a few changes here and there, wanted to stump the government on the issue with backstabbing. After all, they had failed to see the larger threat to democracy if every convicted or charge-sheeted law maker is debarred from the House and prevented to contest electoral process.

Having sniffed the fact that the BJP Parliamentary Board had planned a march to the President against the Ordinance, the Congress Vice President was left with no choice but to triple cross the double-cross efforts of the BJP. However, in this political one upmanship an ordinance that could have saved the democracy from many future challenges was stalled. It is not about one Laloo Yadav going to jail or one Rasheed Masood losing his membership of Parliament that is the core issue, the core issue here is how many emerging mass leaders could be framed and political careers spoiled in the time to come.

Where is this holier-than-thou politics goading to the Indian democracy? Has the greater god for greater number of people being sacrificed for populism is a question that is threatening the future fair play in the battle of democracy. It seems now a few educated middlemen will write the destiny of the masses, even though the larger number will have a right to vote; of course vote only to those who are allowed by the few men sitting over their fate with whatever coloured vision they may be having against the uneducated but popular leaders of the country.   

It seems judicial prudence and law of natural justice is being compromised, if not outrightly butchered in India, thanks to the new wave of populist rhetoric. India is not a tiny country like Singapore where a referendum democracy can work, nor could few vocal voices in the urban pockets be termed as the popular voices or voices of the masses. Unfortunately, today even a few TV news channels have the audacity to call them the ‘Nation’.

The nation, however, does not rest in the studio of a TV news channel, nor in the drawing rooms of those who watch these channels. The way India, the real India deep rooted in the semi rural and rural pockets works, if charge sheet or even being convicted is allowed to rob the democratic rights of the Indians tomorrow any rising mass leader can be framed and convicted. Have not we seen many convicts being declared innocent after decades of trial in various courts? What if they are emerging leaders and hence being framed by the political heavy weights against whom they dared to stand?

The way Indian judiciary functions, if one is not resourceful it takes no less than 20-25 years to get a clean chit from the lower courts to the Supreme Court if one is framed with all the might. Who will compensate if a bright political career is spoiled by getting him convicted? Can the judiciary or those who are carried by populist rhetoric return someone his glorious years fighting in the courts and denied democratic rights to contest elections, even if they have masses with them?

What if the ‘Real’ public support of a mass leader comes out on the streets against his vindictive legal framing? Are we inviting social unrest and civil war in the process? These are the challenges of a large democracy like India that are unique only to this part of the world. So, imagining Singapore or the USA and making a populist statement on cleansing the Indian system in general and politics in particular is simply bullshitting in my opinion.

It is not just about this one Ordinance or the Bill that is the issue today. It seems in every walk of life whether it is judiciary or the media one is either guided by the populist rhetoric or just plain subconscious desire of 15 minute of fame that drives our collective consciousness. And that is something which threatens to derail the democratic process of the country, curtail the civil rights and deny judicial prudence and law of natural justice.

Take for example, ‘None of the Above’ option while electing a candidate in the elections. It may not have much impact in the rural pockets, but in the urban constituencies where the voices leading to populist rhetoric are louder, it may create a unique situation where the constituencies will either be represented by a real tiny mandate or it will go to polls again and again only to get the candidates discarded. The question is who will bear the cost of the repetitive elections? Or does the wisdom of a few drawing room experts think we Indians are fools to go to polling booths, stand in queue for hours only to exercise the right to refuse all?

These are all fancy thoughts that sound unique, ideal and revolutionary at face value. But scratch the surface, dig deeper into the issues that this country confronts on a day-to-day basis and one finds in the name of creating a clean society we are sowing the seeds of political and social unrest. Right to reject or right to recall is a thought that just does not fit into a large, heterogeneous society like India. The architect of the Indian democracy and constitution were not fools who did not address it the way it is being addressed now.  

The alternate voices in politics and other walks of life have always raised their heads in every society. The unique problem with India today is that these alternative voices that raise many questions without themselves having any rational answer are increasingly taking the centre stage. And that is something which threatens to drive the nation not on the merit of issues & agenda but populist rhetoric. If not nipped in the bud, such media orchestrated populist rhetoric also threatens to rob the sanity out of the society.       

Development or developmental engineering replacing social engineering

Oct 9. 2013 Ravi Sinha

Social engineering is passé as it has fallen flat on the face of those who engineered it successfully for long, be it Laloo Yadav in Bihar or Mayawati in Uttar Pradesh. It is ‘Out’ and what has come ‘In’ promises to transform the Indian politics in general and governance in particular. Sadly, this new opium of masses is even more dangerous as this emerging genre of vote bank politics takes even higher a moral ground in the name of ‘Votes for Development’. However, beyond this idealistic façade lies another sort of engineering—‘Developmental Engineering’ which as of now has earned enough curiosity among the media and intellectuals. Its proponents nevertheless fall way short of not just ideals but also ideas for any tangible transformation, be it Narendra Modi or Arvind Kejriwal.      

Intellectuals argue whether any other term has been so over-used and abused in the collective consciousness at the political level than ‘Development’ which, of course, means different things to different people. For some it is the GDP growth that is indicator of development, others find holistic development including liveability index and other social indicator as a benchmark. Populism has also been a development indicator in this part of the world for quite some time, but social engineering is increasingly waning and the void that it creates promises to put development card on the forefront.

With the general elections 2014 a few months away and five states also going for polls, the subject of development has yet again gained prominence. While it is convenient to assume that the young and aspiration driven India is no more ready to be carried by rhetoric alone, a close scrutiny of India’s socio-political consciousness reflects development as an agenda is yet to make inroads into politics and translate into votes. India’s ballot box traction point runs much deeper than macro level media rhetorics. In the name of development, what is actually happening is that a sort of developmental engineering is replacing the tried and tested social engineering that is waning its charm, thanks to its over-use and abuse by the so-called messiah of social justice.

There are two kinds of lies that are applied by respective governments to over-project its development card—plain lies and statistical engineering. The opposition party uses the same methodology to carry home the point lack of development. In plain lies all propaganda machinery is put to use to create an aura of ‘feel good’ or ‘fear psychosis’ which does not have a factual bearing on the ground. Secondly, it is the statistical engineering which is applied and by selective use of statistics it is made to believe that the state’s growth on development index is reflective of its progress. If Narendra Modi symbolises developmental engineering, Arvind Kejriwal is orchestrating plain lies.   

However, GDP growth or economic prosperity on a macro level does not often give the correct picture. Unless the state’s growth has been inclusive and growth is at par or parallel on various social indicators also, such growth is neither sustainable nor tangible enough to be called ‘Greater Good for Greater Number of People’.  

Take for instance the over-hyped and over-projected development model of Gujarat. Indeed the economic growth of Gujarat has been better than the national average. However, equally true is the fact that other states like Delhi, Bihar, Maharashtra, Uttarakhand and Tamil Nadu have done better than Gujarat in recent times. Gujarat is neither the best performer in the top ten best performing states, nor is its growth evaluation on various key indicators any impressive.

Poverty, a key indicator of development is not reducing significantly in Gujarat and its less than impressive performance shows it is at number 18^th position. As per Planning Commission figure all India BPL (Below Poverty Line) percentage has gone down from 37.20 to 29.8 between 2004-05 and 2009-10 whereas Gujarat’s percentage has gone down by only 8.6 points during the same period. Add to it, the Chief Minister Narendra Modi’s lofty economic remark that nutrition has gone down because women are health conscious in the state and eat less. That, of course, is indicative of state’s seriousness with this key development metrics.

Even from a purely economic development standpoint, Gujarat is number nine among the top ten states with percentage of population having concrete roof over head. Even states like Kerala, Himachal Pradesh, Andhra Pradesh and Punjab are ahead of Gujarat; with tiny places like Puducherry and Lakshadweep having better track record than Gujarat.  

In terms of sex ratio, another indicator of a developed state, Gujarat stands at a patriarchal low rank of 20^th position, with only 918 females per 1000 males. Though Gujarat often boasts of better literacy rate than the national average, its standing is at 15^th position in the country. In terms of infant mortality rate, again Gujarat’s statistical projection may boast of better than national average but it stands at 18^th position. Maternal mortality rate also shows states like Kerala, Tamil Nadu, Maharashtra and Andhra Pradesh are doing better than Gujarat.

This raises a fundamental question about the developmental engineering and its relevance beyond the vote bank politics. The moot point is development for whom and at what cost? Definitely, a development plank meant for industrialists can not be an effective development model. When the Congress President Sonia Gandhi emphasised that “passion for progress must be supplemented with compassion for poor” during deliberation on Food Security Bill, it was that grand vision of development model on which Gujarat stands nowhere.

Gujarat is just a case study here, but the fact of the matter is that many of the states that boast of development as their USP may not come out with relatively modest score when judged with all the key indicators of development. Reasons why many of the governments are shown the door even after creating so much of development projection, most classic example being the ‘India Shining’ of Atal Behari Vajpayee Government at centre.

In India the elections have by and large not been contested on development plank; it is just that the term development that is symptomatic of the developmental engineering instead of social engineering which has lived its shelf life. And it is not just the politicians alone who are to be blamed for this. What are we up to as Indians, as vote banks? Do we really scrutiny to differentiate the wheat from the chaff? If so, how come someone like Arvind Kejriwal take a moral high ground with absolutely no solution to offer for most of the developmental, both social and economic, problems afflicting the Indians.

So, it is basically one rhetoric being replaced by another without any tangible focus on development that still stands as the bane of Indian democracy. The mirage of a better governance continues; some have channelized it in the name of social justice while others are orchestrating in the name of development. Some others with no track record have taken an altogether different route of developmental engineering in the name of creating an utopian society. India just stands as the laboratory for all engineering and the Indian voters are at the best guinea pigs for them.  

Sorry Mr TVR Shenoy, your advocacy won’t make Modi a polarising factor

July 4, 2013, Ravi Sinha

Veteran journalists often become ‘veteran’ on the merit of their ideological backing to a given political party. It is not necessary that they actually believe in what they advocate publicly. But in the process they turn out to be the poor Xerox version of party hopping politicians looking for happy hunting ground. Senior journalist TVR Shenoy’s recent assumption of BJP being in a positioning to form a stable government at Centre and Narendra Modi being a polarising factor is a classic case in point.

Though I do not carry any authority to dictate or moderate any individuals’ fundamental right to opt for a governance choice—good, bad or indifferent but still would maintain that a political analyst should not write a pleasure analysis to a political party that promises to boomerang on the face of the writer itself in the days to come. Having said this, I understand that what bifurcates between political analysis and political advocacy in collective consciousness is very thin, especially when the stakes are pretty high, ranging from decorative ‘Padma Bibhushan’ to coveted ‘Rajya Sabha’ seat.

I believe it is better to be known as a journalist with outstanding credibility and tell on the face of the political party their grey zones, even if one ideologically supports them. That gives the journalist more credibility both as a party ideologue and from advocacy standpoint. With my limited exposure and understanding of Indian politics after nearly two decades of having seen it closely; first as a student leader, then a trade unionist and later as a journalist, I find no merit in the argument that next Lok Sabha will have a BJP-led government.

Even if BJP emerges as the single largest party in the next Lok Sabha elections, it is not the same BJP with a Vajpayee kind of manipulative organiser to hold the flock of 24 unlike-minded political parties. An arrogant Modi is not acceptable to the BJP itself within the party, forget the alliance partners.

Furthermore, the argument that the single largest party keeping out of government is a fundamental insult to the democracy is a misplaced conviction. This also challenges the fundamental tenets of democracy which has never been able to representational character world over. Added to this, the history of Indian democracy shows how the Congress has itself opted out of the government twice despite of emerging as the single largest party.

In the general election of 1989 the Congress won 197 seats, well ahead of the (then united) Janata Dal, which won 143 seats and BJP 85 seats with the Left Front getting 52 seats. V P Singh then became the Prime Minister not by playing on the fears of both the BJP and the Left Front, as TVR Shenoy would like us to believe, but because the Congress read the writing of an unstable government on the wall and strategically played it smart to bounce back to power within 15 months.

History repeated itself again in 1996 when the single largest party in the eleventh Lok Sabha was the BJP, with 161 seats. The Congress was second, having won 140 seats. But while the BJP remained untouchable to forge an alliance for the government, Congress played the trump card by roping in the Prime Minister of India to a man from a party with just 46 seats, the Janata Dal. True to the expectations of the Congress, the eleventh Lok Sabha lasted just over eighteen months before it was dissolved.

Coming to the next Lok Sabha elections, whether 2014 or 2013 itself, while the BJP is struggling to cope up with the leadership changes where the party stalwarts themselves are up against the so-called polarising figure in Modi, the BJP is slowly but surely losing grip on its core constituency and the states that it rules. If Karnataka was a big blow to them, coming assembly elections in Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh are poised to be the beginning of the end of the BJP era that Vajpayee heralded 1996 onwards.

Moreover, no leader in any political party has ever been able to emerge as the national leader who does not come from the Hindi heartland, and Modi is no exception. Even Morarji Desai could not challenge this reality of Indian politics. Modi’s mindless PR of having saved 15,000 Gujaratis in Uttarakhand calamity in a single day has already proved that the rumour machinery that he so successfully managed in Gujarat does not have a national charisma. Added to this, the criminal cases related with Godhra and fake encounters looming large over his fortunes would be a great dampener for the BJP on the eve of general elections.

The short sighted parent organisation that the RSS is, it is also not helping the cause of the BJP. The saffron brigade that only recently glorified the so-called transparency movement of Anna Hazare assuming that such a rumour and road-side publicity stunt would defame the Congress and mobilise votes for them has already boomeranged on the BJP. Now Kejriwal may not be in a position to win any elections for his party but will surely eat into the anti-incumbency votes that would have otherwise gone to the BJP. Needless to say, the conventional wisdom of electoral politics suggests that such Index of Opposition Diversity is going to help the Congress in a big way.   

Moreover, the Congress that is the most strategic in governance and electoral politics has already started working on Plan A and Plan B. Remember it was not the BJP but the Congress that started Modi’s name dropping as a strategic ploy to play with the mind of the BJP. The realisation that the next Lok Sabha elections would be purely on national issues made them add fuel to the fire of so-called polarisation. And now it is going to be secular versus communal forces where even the regional parties are forced to take sides.

As a result, BJP’s first casualty has been Bihar Government of Nitish Kumar who is up to the sleeves of the Congress as Plan B. And since BJP is increasingly losing ground in each of the states, this game plan has viability as well. In case Congress fails to form its own government, something like the 1989 or 1996 scenario, it will extend outside support to the Third Front. Mr Shenoy’s remark on Third Front alliance of Nitish Kumar, Mamata Banerjee, Navin Patnaik as East India Company is a racist statement in my opinion.

Such right wing political advocacy only makes the ideologue lose his credibility and lose his political spectrum as well in the long run. In the BJP right from Govindacharya to Swapan Dasgupta there is a long list of ideologues who floated heroic theories of BJP Government at the Centre only to be sidelined in course of its inherent failure. It is not the political advocacy that leads to the government formation but the ground realities that are at odds against the BJP. I can just wish Mr TVR Shenoy all the best…