Indian democracy must become attractive to skilled people such as those who have domain expertise

Last month, the YSR Congress elected Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister Jagan Mohan Reddy as its chief for lifetime. In China, Xi Jinping has such credentials. India is a democracy. China is a one party nation and a totalitarian state. What kind of democracy the YSR Congress fosters is not just the business of Jagan Mohan Reddy, but also of those who have stakes in the Indian democracy.

The president of the Rashtriya Janata Dal has invariably been from within the Lalu Prasad Yadav family. Same is the case with the Samajwadi Party. Similar is the story of the Shiromani Akali Dal, the Shiv Sena, the Telangana Rashtra Samithi, and some others. On a closer look, the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam also fits in the same slot. Even the Congress presents no different story in the last few decades.

The Representation of the People’s Act has failed to stop some political parties becoming family-owned enterprises. India abolished the practice of Zamindari in 1951. Yet, their political avatars have mushroomed in many states, carving out territories by cashing in on identity politics, to imprison democracy to a few families.

At a time when India celebrates 75 years of Independence, while the world applauds the depth and diversity of democracy, lawmakers must introspect that under their watch the political zamindari has taken a large space, which should have otherwise been with the genuine leaders, who would have come from the political grinding to command leadership of a large base of the population.

That makes it incumbent for radical reforms to be carried out immediately by holding discussions with stakeholders in a time-bound manner to blank out any prospect of any family usurping a political party.

To put this to effect, the RPA Act can be suitably amended to prohibit a person from holding more than two terms of the post of the president of a political party. It should also be ensured that when that person leaves the post, it cannot be held by anyone who has family relations with him for not less than 10 years.

There is no denying the fact that politics in the country has become more caste-centric. This calls for a review of the reserved seats for the Lok Sabha, State Assemblies, Zila Panchayat and Local Bodies. Why should only a scheduled caste or tribe politician represent a reserved seat, and what stops a general category politician from working for such constituencies who have been disadvantaged for decades.

The Directive Principle of the Constitution and the teachings of Mahatma Gandhi call for social amity, and politics is the foremost means of achieving such aims. The aims for Samajik Samrasta (social inclusiveness) make it incumbent to shuffle reserved seats without attaching them to demographic profile, while also not impacting on the number of such seats. This will bring true inclusiveness. This will make the candidates from the reserved constituencies win from the general seats, which will boost their political profiles, and also make them take up more meaningful roles in the socio-economic progress of the nation than just being stereotyped as an SC or ST leader.

The reforms should also aim for provisions which will ensure that there is a larger participation of the political workers from the disadvantaged sections of the society in the Indian democracy to genuinely address aspirations of all the sections.

The Election Commission can be mandated to shuffle the reserved seats in each election so that there is a larger pool of leaders available to serve the nation in the true spirit of social democracy.

In this context, reforms should also take a closer look at the participation of women, scheduled caste and tribe leaders in all wings of democracy, and statutorily ensure that anomalies are addressed.

More than 90 per cent of the political workers are not known to have any means of livelihood. Still, they aren’t seen begging anywhere, and rather they move around in sports vehicles. This is the story from Gram Panchayat to State capitals and the national capital. People don’t pay much attention to their means of income, taking for granted that they must be hailing from well-off family backgrounds.

This brings to the attention the backgrounds of the likes of Akhilesh Yadav or Aditya Thackeray, for there’s no public records to show their sources of incomes to justify their lavish lifestyles. They are prominent names of Indian politics, but there would be millions of political workers who never had enough education to find jobs and so they found it convenient to join politics.

This is indeed India’s paradox that we aspire for the country to be free from corruption but the life and breath of democracy are ensured by an army of workers who have no known sources of incomes. They may engage in ways which may not be appropriate for their livelihoods, while also incurring necessary expenditure on behalf of their political parties.

This again calls for deep reforms in electoral politics, and we should not be apologetic to admit that we need to pay a respectable salary to a political worker who is working full time. This salary has to be paid by political parties, but they have to be bound under the suitable law, which should be auditable by a government agency, with the oversight to be vested with the Election Commission. That will be the serious attempt to get rid of political corruption, as it will also pave the way for a close monitoring of the assets of the political leaders.

Additionally, the Election Commission must breathe fresh air and admit that there is no rationality in the expenditure ceilings in the Lok Sabha and the Assembly elections, and also on the grounds of the geography, as well as the size of the constituencies. There must be rationalization of expenditure ceilings, for this again is a ground for massive electoral corruption, as dummy candidates are put up to cover additional expenses of candidates, besides also being the reasons for more vices in the election system in the country.

In the 1990s, the political leaders brainstormed about India of the 21st century. We have been two decades old in the 21st century and our electoral democracy remains rugged and outdated, not rising to the challenges of the new era, where the people are educated, besides being aspirational, along with India aiming to take a prominent position on the high table in the international arena.

Until we shake off the dust that the electoral democracy has gathered over several decades, no genuine gains can go to the deserving people. India at 75 must ensure that anyone with fire in his or her belly to serve the nation can join politics without worrying for his or her livelihood and progress in politics. 

Indian democracy must become attractive to skilled people such as those who have domain expertise of law, international relations, economy, social science, arts, informational and technology and so on. India at 75 must also be of skilled and honest politicians, and zero tolerance for the new-age zamindars.

(The author is Director, Public Policy Research Centre.)