Recent experiences indicate that the legislative Assembly of Odisha was very often not permitted to function and Bills have been converted into Acts without appropriate debates. It has also been a common experience to find the tenures of sessions of the legislative Assembly being shortened. With a recent amendment, the House can now determine the number of days without there being any critical minimum number of days for which it should function with a brute majority, the wish of the House becomes the pleasure of the ruling party.
And in this scenario, there has suddenly been a proposal for having a legislative Council. With the gradually diminishing relevance of the legislative Assembly in the discharge of its paramount representative function, the proposal appears to be incongruous. That explains the allegation that the ruling party wants to rehabilitate some of its leaders, who have not made it to the legislative Assembly or could not contest in the last elections.
Odisha never had a legislative Council and its necessity has hardly been felt. Though a council will provide representation of different professions or vocations, in the prevalent situation in the State, the constituencies that shall send representatives appear to be in disarray. The cooperative and educational sectors are already infected by inadequate governance. The leaderships in these spheres have not shown any active efforts towards policy formulations. This is also equally true of the civic bodies handling the crucial sphere of self-Government. Bureaucratisation of administration has been on the increase and the participation of people’s representatives has steadily declined. These features have led to legitimate doubts about efficacy of a legislative Council.
The expenditure on the legislature and the Secretariat has been ever increasing. Creation of a legislative Council would add to the costs of administration without any assured improvement in the realm of governance. A decision in this regard does not really necessitate a visit to two States to study the functioning of the legislative Councils there. The proceedings of legislative Councils and the related documents need to be first studied to assess the efficacy of the role of these institutions in the States where they exist. It is also common knowledge that the nominated members of such a council, though formally made by the Governor of the State, would eventually be conditioned by the advice of the Council of Ministers. The experience relating to several nominations into different positions has indicated a tilt in favour of political patronage and the proficiency of the persons concerned has been nominal.
In this background, an intensive study of the real necessity of bringing into existence a legislative Council becomes necessary before we embark upon further steps in this regard. It is quite likely that eminent and competent academicians and other professionals will eventually not find a place in the council. In the event of the ruling party not having a dominant majority in the Assembly, it may face lack of majority in the Council. The effects of such a situation are already demonstrated in the passing of Bills in the Rajya Sabha. This has resulted in promulgation of Ordinances though democratic accountability demands that Ordinances be by exceptions and not as a rule.
The voters at large have hardly expressed any reaction to the proposal of creation of a legislative Council. A public debate in this regard has hardly taken place. Brainstorming with eminent and expert professionals has not been undertaken to evaluate the efficacy of such a proposal. There has hardly been any public demand in this regard. One cannot, therefore, blame a section of voters to call the proposal as an instrument of diversionary tactics. lakhs of people belonging to lower income groups have been defrauded through illegal activities indulged in by the spate of chit fund. The mining sector has thrown up a can of worms and has demonstrated non-implementation of laws over decades. Thousands of crores have not been collected from electricity distribution companies. The Government has not bothered to make its submissions before the OERC in the proceedings for fixation of tariff. Several development programmes have not been appropriately implemented so as to subserve the social objectives they are meant to achieve. Streamlining and tightening of administration in this regard have been left to the bureaucratic personnel.
The role of democratically elected representatives has gradually declined and has been coupled with increased dominance and influence of insensitive and authoritative administration. The epidemic of jaundice in Sambalpur and few other places is attributed to the contamination of the piped water supplies undertaken by the civic bodies and other agencies. There was a time when clean and safe water was meant to be ensured through a public distribution system as a duty of civic bodies. But alas, safe water has become a profitable business in the hands of a few in the private sector.
In this state of disarray, one wonders whether a legislative Council would provide adequate panacea to the problems that plague the State. More than half a century ago, Biju Patnaik, as the Chief Minister, had declared that Odisha would have no thatched houses, every house would have piped water supply, and unclean slums would not be permitted to grow. That has remained an unfulfilled promise and has now reemerged as a policy of the Government after more than five decades. Its implementation may again be left to the rusted officialdom.
Arrangements for the Nabakalebar of lord Jagannath are still progressing at a limping pace. The unconstitutional entrustment of building restrictions and land use management continue with the Development Authorities whereas with the passing of the Constitution 74th Amendment Act, 1992 (implemented from 1st June, 1993), such functions by Constitutional mandate has to be entrusted to municipalities. Similarly, the Constitutional provisions regarding strengthening of the Panchayati Raj system are yet to be effectively implemented. land management by different departments has continued to be governed by unfettered discretion. The creation of a legislative Council does not appear to be of reasonable priority for enhancing the quality of governance. There is an old dictum in welfare economics that a majority decision-making is not always necessarily rational. It is imperative for the voters to express their opinion through public debates and the media has not also reflected the real picture without fear or favour.
This requires concerted and organised public action. Voters today range from students from the age of 18 to many retired persons, many of whom could be octogenarians. The present scenario requires considered and resolute views of different segments among a vast and varied class of voters. Strangely, the so-called intellectuals appear to be silent in this regard. This is a symptom of distortion and diffidence, raising doubts regarding the validity of the age-old saying that democracy is ‘for the people, by the people and of the people’. The catalysts have to wake up and the people’s voice must be audible, amongst other things in this vital decision. And this concerns us.
(The writer, a Senior Advocate, is a former All India Service officer, a former diplomat, a former editor and a former Advocate General of Odisha. jayantdas@hotmail.com)