It's high time the government and the all the political parties understood the power of the informed citizens
Despite being the largest democracy, India is still on the path of evolution to merit the title. In an exceptionally diverse country like ours, the only acceptable form of governance is deliberative democracy, where the primary source of legitimacy of the law emerges from debates and discussions involving all stakeholders.
There are two major components of deliberative democracy — deliberation among citizens, and between citizens and their representatives. The people's representatives debate in Parliament. However, in the past two decades, there is an undesirable decline in the nature and number of debates and discussions on the floor of the House, and routine adjournments have become part and parcel of Parliament's schedule. The government has forced the passage of several crucial Bills without substantive debates. If Bills of controversial nature are introduced and put for passage in haste, it stokes citizens' suspicion of the government's alleged ulterior motives. The attempt to pass the Women’s Reservation Bill and the controversial Communal Violence Bill are the two important cases in question.
The women’s reservation issue has been in the public domain for more than fifteen years and a Parliamentary committee has deliberated upon its modalities in details. As there are still some unresolved issues, the Bill warrants a concerted effort to understand the concerns of all stakeholders.
As for the Communal Violence Bill, it hogged the limelight for all the wrong reasons. The Bill is devoid of reactions from both citizens and their representatives. The unnecessary rush in which the Bill was tabled for passage in the small 12-sitting Winter Session of Parliament has raised genuine concerns as there is a kind of polarisation going on in the country on the communal lines. The Muzaffarnagar riots impacted the lives of both the majority and minority communities, but the post-riot consequences are being faced by the minority community members who are spending their lives in relief camps.
However, it is not the first time that a regime in power is coming out with such consequential Bills on the eve of election. The much-talked about piece of legislation, Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, too was introduced on the eve of election as there was upsurge in violence against these sections in the society. The then government’s move to pass the Bill arose from two major factors — mounting pressure from social groups, and the possibility of creating a new vote-bank by passing the Bill ahead of the general election. Even though this progressive legislation was passed on the eve of election, it was widely debated and discussed by MPs. It is another matter that at that time the ruling party had an absolute majority. This is not the case now.
We are in the era of coalition wherein not only groups are representing themselves but also the parties are representing the opposite camps. Therefore ignoring their views regarding the controversial Bills only emboldens the suspicion of the Government’s intention, as there was plenty of time for discussions if the Bill could have been introduced earlier.
The state is responsible for protecting its citizens from any kind of violence but when the state has to formulate laws of significant nature it must involve the citizens to remove doubts about the intentions of the government. If the timing of the important but controversial legislations raises the banner of doubt and revolt among the citizens and the Opposition parties, then the government can’t ignore the other opinion. This is not to suggest that all collective decisions stand vindicated, but deliberation, at least, does save the government from the blame arising out of the bad effects of the legislation.
It is strange that at a time when the civil society is showing eagerness to be more involved in the issues of public importance, the government is becoming arrogant and disdainful of other views. There is a glaring example of the Jan lokpal Bill movement. While the civil society initiative led by Anna and his associates attracted widespread support from the public for a strong anti-corruption law, political dispensation, particularly the ruling party, was not even ready to discuss the proposal.
But the arrogance of the ruling party has already given birth to an unexpected new phenomenon called Aam Aadmi Party. If the democratic process and those at the helm of affairs do not allow dissenting voices to have their say, the citizens will either lose confidence in the political system or create the strange players to amend the system.
It’s high time the government and the all the political parties understood the power of the informed citizens and accept Hobson’s choice available to them — listen to citizens’ voices.
(The write is faculty, Dr KRN Centre for Dalit and Minorities Studies, Jamia Millia Islamia, New Delhi)