The present-day corruption, criminalisation, bribing, family rule and feudal dominance in socio-political life have been a matter of concern for all.
Representation in democracy should be inclusive of class, caste and gender and it is more challenging in a multi-cultural and multi-religious country like India. The aspirations of people from different socio-economic status should be represented through theirrepresentatives in governance.The 16th lok Sabha has only 11 per cent women and four per cent Muslim and other minorities. Majority of members across ruling and opposition belong to the rich class.
There should be a basic change in our present electoral system to strengthen democracy and inclusive governance. The composition and character of the governing bodies taking decisions on behalf of the people should be changed as per the demand of the present scenario. In the context of electoral reforms, State funding of elections features as one of the most important aspects. Equally important is proportional representation system.
The election system in practice has been pro-rich, where candidates play bigger role than parties, and candidates from poor economic background and small parties and financially weak parties have very less chance to win because they cannot compete in campaign with financially powerful parties.The corporate sector decides winners, while corruption and bribing influence the election results. The corporates also influence policy making process of governance in their favour and prevent genuine representation of the candidates by encouraging unfair competition.
The 2014 general elections in the country for lok Sabha and State Assembly witnessed huge spending of money in campaign by parties and candidates. Mostly voters were bribed to vote, though law is there to prevent the practice.Many parties used helicopters and helipads for high profile campaigning all over the country taking special help of film stars and celebrities. The print and electronic media was used day and night to propagate in support of the parties. All these cost some thousand crores.
Many party leaders spent huge amount in building their public image through advertising in print and electronic media and displayed big public hoardings.Though there is provision for ceiling in candidates’ expenses in election but there is no ceiling imposed by the political parties spending during elections.
The Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR) sources say that in the 15th lok Sabha, out of 543 members elected as many as 306 MPs are croropaties. Total 8,198 candidates contested in the 16th lok Sabha election, out of which 2,214 are croropaties. For 21 lok Sabha constituencies of Odisha, total 195 candidates of 34 parties including independent candidates contested the election out of which 55 candidates had declared them as croropaties in their nominations. In the present lok Sabha, 82 per cent MPs are croropaties with total assets of `7,850 crores.
It has ramifications on State of politics in poor States like Odisha with huge poverty and low income. It is discussed in media that ruling party’s bosses sold out tickets to those who have paid huge bribe to them. The mining and industrial lobby has played a substantial role in selection of candidates.
Even many genuine prospective candidates within the party have revolted against this kind of move but they were helpless onlookers. The criminal background of the candidates almost was ignored, while candidates with money and backing from industrial and corporate houses were chosen as nominees by the political parties. Their educational background and experience in public life did not matter much.
The sources of donation to the political parties have been restricted through provisions of laws like the Representation of the Peoples Act, 1951, the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act, 2010 (FCRA) and the Companies Act, 1956.There have been a large number of complaints in media against political parties for violating FCRA rules, for not having submitting audited statement of accounts and lack of transparency and accountability in dealing with party fund during elections. Many of the parties lack internal party democracy and mostly ruled by family, individuals and dominant groups.
There has been growing demand by many political parties for State funding. Years back the matter was discussed in Constituent Assembly by Prof KT Shah who moved an amendment that election expenses should be borne by the State.
The Dinesh Goswami Committee (Former law Minister) on electoral reforms in 1990, Indrajeet Gupta Committee on State funding of elections 1998, Second Administrative Reform Commission, 2008, and law Commission report on reforms of the electoral laws 1999, the Ministry of law and Justice and Company Affairs constituted a committee on State funding of election which submitted its reports in 1999, have extensively referred to the issue. Former Chief Election Commissioner of India SY Quraishi had argued in favour of State funding and said it can help end political corruption.
The committee’s recommendation suggested for State funding to registered State and National parties with restrictions and further said that election commission had to work out modalities on this.
It is argued that this can start with partial funding and the funding should be preferable in kind like rent free accommodation, rent free telephone, free time in Doordarshan and AIR, fuel for vehicles engaged in election, paper for printing, loud speaker, free telephone, support for counting agents etc. In order to reduce the expenses, there should be restriction on political parties using helicopter during election.
There are parties and individuals oppose State funding taking the plea that taxpayers are indirectly forced to pay for election expenses of all political parties. Rather they want to limit their contribution to the parties whom they support.With State funding, the political parties become part of the State rather than the representative of their supporter in particular and people in general. It will affect the ultimate accountability to people.
The party candidates may depend more on State than their leaders and the role of elites in party will be reduced that may affect the performance of parties dominated by individuals and families. Many left parties supporting State funding are in opinion that the parties should not be controlled by State in the name of funding because it will downsize the political role of a party in holding State accountable.
However many parties and campaign like Campaign for Electoral Reforms in India (CERI) argued that state funding of elections is a necessary cost of democracy and governance and not a huge burden on State.This process will contribute to reduce dependency of political parties on the corporate sector. The State funding of elections with strict legal measures will contribute to limiting the role of private corporates, communal, casteist and extremist bodies in election.
It further argued that in poor societies, ordinary members of the party cannot support party’s election fund. There are countries like Germany, France, Austria, Sweden, Denmark, Norway, Brazil, Japan, Spain, Italy and many others who have already adopted State funding for political parties.
The International Institute of Democracy and Electoral Assistance (IDEA) of Sweden, working with the Election Commission of India on electoral reforms and strengthening democracy says out of total 180 countries, 71 countries have facilities of giving State funds based on votes obtained and 86 per cent of the countries in Europe and 58 per cent in Asia have adopted this.
In democracy, there should be fair access to representation which includes fair election and participation. The State funding will pave the way for building genuine party representation and the feudal and hegemonic rule in parties will came to an end which is very much required for a healthier democracy.
This process may encourage marginalised groups such as working class, labourers, peasants, Dalits, Adivasis, religious and ethnic minority, women and regional parties to improve their participation. A free and fair election will ensure good governance and development.
(The writer is rights activist, who can be reached at ojaabbsr@gmail.com)