First, there was monarchy, where a ruler ruled mostly by force, owned national property, had right to collect taxes but no accountability, and was mostly hereditary. Citizens rarely had a chance to elect/ select/ nominate the rulers.
Then came the Roman Republic, where the senate was nominated/ elected, but mostly by the patricians, the landed gentry.
Then came parliamentary democracy, where people elected their rulers, both local and national, who framed laws and also formed part of the executive.
Parallelly, judiciary was envisaged and established to judge crimes and disputes and enforce laws. Further it was taken out of the influence of legislature and executive to ensure its independence.
That has been the path to the present system. And it is more or less similar across all developed and even a large number of democratic developing countries.
India is a fragmented country – regionally, linguistically, culturally and religiously. At the time of the birth of modern India, Western skeptics believed that it will not sustain as an integral state. But it has survived and grown stronger. The magic glue that bonds this entity is its democracy, its commitment to uphold the institution. Only once in the history of the modern India, in 1975, was it subverted, and the perpetrator suffered the wrath of the people at the hustings.
As a society, as a polity, our moral fibre has been weak for centuries now. In an earlier article I had written about how citizens ignore their own misdemeanors and breaches of law but pounce on the politicians as if the politicians came in a space ship from a different planet. This is hypocritical, escapist and gravely wrong. But batting for political class has never been easy in any part of the world at any point of time, and especially when you are amidst one of the most corrupt lot in recent times. In the backdrop of large scale political corruption, and raging inflation the emotions on the street are understandable.
But blaming it on the weakness of an actually strong and robust system is the second layer of error. We need to understand that creating one more layer of governance is not a panacea because as a corrupt society, we have the pernicious ability to undermine that institution as well. Thus it is unlikely that it is going to be a long term solution. A society, which has thrown up immoral political leaders and corrupted judges, can corrupt the ombudsman and her team as well.
If that ‘civil society’, comprising of 1.5 million people ‘represent’ 1.1 billion citizens, outside the extant norms of democracy, and the media believe it to be so, and thus the government finally capitulates, so be it. But this is not a “permanent” solution, and will have finite and perhaps limited shelf life if we do not change ourselves.
In terms of legislations, a more permanent one has been legislated in recent years. Citizen’s right to know the actions and the thoughts behind those actions, of the executive is an immutable and inalienable right. It is also immensely empowering, even within the present system as has been borne out in our recent experience. While it has not been easy to get the present day RTI legislations enacted, it was done through sustained advocacy and discussion (hallmarks of a developed state), without subverting the fulcrum of our sovereign existence - the parliamentary democracy. Without any brinksmanship, any hullaballoo, any street melodrama and any concentrated public focus on one individual. In fact Aruna Roy got more news print in airing her differences on Jan Lokpal, than her immense contribution towards bringing out RTI.
What is being set here is a dangerous precedent. I do not need to spell it out here, as it has already been outlined by various people who understand the risks of this (here is a sample). And what is being sought, is flawed, and at best temporary.
I am worried and sad about the celebrity worshipping, escapist and herd mentality of the TV watching and Newspaper reading urban milieu. In place of introspection and self correction, what is happening here is witch hunt in the wrong presumption that the political class is completely born and bred in isolation and then imposed upon the hapless citizens who have pristine morals which then gets completely subverted by these extraterrestrials. This cannot bode well in the long run.
My friends on the other side say that “This is the beginning.” I can’t help but agree (disagreeing is not healthy in these days of “either you are with us or against us”). But I am not sure this is the beginning of what. End of reason?
