The Lokpal, still in its prenatal stage, has just not inspired the hope in me that might have led me to look into the provisions of the bill. The reason maybe the Lokpal’s portrayal as the larger-than-life saviour we have been praying for. On a purely jocular note, the suggestion is almost akin to stating that joining Facebook will make me more socially adept by letting me bond with every soul walking the face of the earth. The last ten days, though, couldn't just be ignored.
It all began with the preventive detention of Anna after he'd averred that he would flout the section 144 imposed by the Delhi police. If the Government had shown such zeal and endeavour throughout its tenure, and made one preventive detention after another every time someone from within showed signs of being on the wrong side of the law, there might not have been an outpour in the press, or the streets. The Court's strictures too could have been precluded.
Every episode that catches our attention usually defies our imagination, and what followed the detention was one such. Despite the Delhi downpour, people filled the streets. It wasn't a rabble that was keen on making the most of its ephemeral hour of power -- like the political ones that call for bandhs and fulminate -- but a troop answering the trumpet call of Anna, and determined to fall in line with his idea of a peaceful protest. They would court arrest, only to be horded together in a stadium which, rather than having an air of dejection, became an alternative venue for remonstration. Tihar had equally been transformed.
Seeking to change tacks, the power-wielders set off face-saving negotiations, only without taking in the changes in the playing field. They eventually acceded to most of Anna's demands regards his planned protest; except, Indians are often labelled a sentimental people, and the Government's callousness was seen to have risen a notch or two when it expressed regret and decided against an unconditional apology for what has largely been viewed as an attack on a citizen's fundamental right of protest. The chorus has since become more and more resounding, and Anna's support abounding. It has been fascinating to witness the capacity of this one soul to pick the strings of thousands of hearts and make them sing the patriotic tune.
Yet, there is cause for concern. One need not be an expert on governance, nor a seasoned political thinker, to believe that there is more to voting than a raffle that picks a lucky chap from among the crowd. With all due respect, Anna's assessment of an elected representative as a mere servant of his constituency is rather simplistic. To begin with, the election of a leader is a simultaneous admission of one's inability and an expression of one's hope; a hope that the leader, chosen by consensus, will not only act on the mandate he is entrusted with, but also demonstrate prescient vision and a better perception of the picture confronting him than can a layman.
If our leaders have formed an oligarchy, we have either turned a blind eye to their deficiencies, or have been blindfolded by considerations other than their abilities, dedication and ambition. Yes, the abuse of power should, and does, breed angst.
Fortunately, the angst can be stemmed from turning to despair, for we still are a democracy. As sensational as the scenes from a Tahrir Square might have been, we still have a recourse that the Egyptians didn't, and should count our blessings. Agreed, the next general elections are three years away, but some of the states are scheduled to go to polls in the coming days. If Anna's campaign has truly sensitized us, as a nation, to the notion that bribes and bungling are ills -- whose symptoms range from holding back basic amenities, snatching away of arable lands to black-market cornering of the country's resources by corporate entities -- that have been nourished, at least, in part, by our own stupor, the ideal way to rein in the political mavericks may be by branding them; branding them ineffective and unwanted. Team Anna have repeatedly claimed that an overwhelming majority of Indians are backing them, and despite the doubts about the reach of their 'preferendum', the only means of impressing upon the politician the extent of this support would be through the ballots.
Anna has maintained that this is India's second freedom struggle. It took us ninety years to gain freedom after the First War of Indian Independence that galvanized us as a nation. Three years, in comparison, seems tolerable. Patience and persistence, after all, are part and parcel of a nonviolent movement. Unlike the despotic era of Pre-Independence India, we may resort, today, to electing representatives who may significantly contribute to making the laws less draconian and more favorable to us as a people. As such, we should neither lose faith in our constitutional institutions, nor seek to bypass them, for they have been established by laws we have given unto ourselves; laws which we will need to respect and adhere to, or change by using the provisions ingrained in them by the sagacious and farsighted committee that drafted the constitution.
A movement seeking quick-fix solutions based simply on the numbers on the street could set a bad precedent. Might alone cannot be right. Although the path of polls might seem winding, too long, and, perhaps, romantic, it would resuscitate our democracy and revive trust -- a triumph that would befit Anna's efforts more than a victory in the Jan Lokpal skirmish. Imagine having a more empathetic Parliament and Legislatures. We might even be able to rewrite our constitution to plug gaps, as Anna is said to have once opined. Anna has ensured that the nation throbs with an urge to act, but the urge needs this democratic dream.
It all began with the preventive detention of Anna after he'd averred that he would flout the section 144 imposed by the Delhi police. If the Government had shown such zeal and endeavour throughout its tenure, and made one preventive detention after another every time someone from within showed signs of being on the wrong side of the law, there might not have been an outpour in the press, or the streets. The Court's strictures too could have been precluded.
Every episode that catches our attention usually defies our imagination, and what followed the detention was one such. Despite the Delhi downpour, people filled the streets. It wasn't a rabble that was keen on making the most of its ephemeral hour of power -- like the political ones that call for bandhs and fulminate -- but a troop answering the trumpet call of Anna, and determined to fall in line with his idea of a peaceful protest. They would court arrest, only to be horded together in a stadium which, rather than having an air of dejection, became an alternative venue for remonstration. Tihar had equally been transformed.
Seeking to change tacks, the power-wielders set off face-saving negotiations, only without taking in the changes in the playing field. They eventually acceded to most of Anna's demands regards his planned protest; except, Indians are often labelled a sentimental people, and the Government's callousness was seen to have risen a notch or two when it expressed regret and decided against an unconditional apology for what has largely been viewed as an attack on a citizen's fundamental right of protest. The chorus has since become more and more resounding, and Anna's support abounding. It has been fascinating to witness the capacity of this one soul to pick the strings of thousands of hearts and make them sing the patriotic tune.
Yet, there is cause for concern. One need not be an expert on governance, nor a seasoned political thinker, to believe that there is more to voting than a raffle that picks a lucky chap from among the crowd. With all due respect, Anna's assessment of an elected representative as a mere servant of his constituency is rather simplistic. To begin with, the election of a leader is a simultaneous admission of one's inability and an expression of one's hope; a hope that the leader, chosen by consensus, will not only act on the mandate he is entrusted with, but also demonstrate prescient vision and a better perception of the picture confronting him than can a layman.
If our leaders have formed an oligarchy, we have either turned a blind eye to their deficiencies, or have been blindfolded by considerations other than their abilities, dedication and ambition. Yes, the abuse of power should, and does, breed angst.
Fortunately, the angst can be stemmed from turning to despair, for we still are a democracy. As sensational as the scenes from a Tahrir Square might have been, we still have a recourse that the Egyptians didn't, and should count our blessings. Agreed, the next general elections are three years away, but some of the states are scheduled to go to polls in the coming days. If Anna's campaign has truly sensitized us, as a nation, to the notion that bribes and bungling are ills -- whose symptoms range from holding back basic amenities, snatching away of arable lands to black-market cornering of the country's resources by corporate entities -- that have been nourished, at least, in part, by our own stupor, the ideal way to rein in the political mavericks may be by branding them; branding them ineffective and unwanted. Team Anna have repeatedly claimed that an overwhelming majority of Indians are backing them, and despite the doubts about the reach of their 'preferendum', the only means of impressing upon the politician the extent of this support would be through the ballots.
Anna has maintained that this is India's second freedom struggle. It took us ninety years to gain freedom after the First War of Indian Independence that galvanized us as a nation. Three years, in comparison, seems tolerable. Patience and persistence, after all, are part and parcel of a nonviolent movement. Unlike the despotic era of Pre-Independence India, we may resort, today, to electing representatives who may significantly contribute to making the laws less draconian and more favorable to us as a people. As such, we should neither lose faith in our constitutional institutions, nor seek to bypass them, for they have been established by laws we have given unto ourselves; laws which we will need to respect and adhere to, or change by using the provisions ingrained in them by the sagacious and farsighted committee that drafted the constitution.
A movement seeking quick-fix solutions based simply on the numbers on the street could set a bad precedent. Might alone cannot be right. Although the path of polls might seem winding, too long, and, perhaps, romantic, it would resuscitate our democracy and revive trust -- a triumph that would befit Anna's efforts more than a victory in the Jan Lokpal skirmish. Imagine having a more empathetic Parliament and Legislatures. We might even be able to rewrite our constitution to plug gaps, as Anna is said to have once opined. Anna has ensured that the nation throbs with an urge to act, but the urge needs this democratic dream.
Comments
disrespecting democracy and subverting the constitution will do our country no good.
Btw all these people out on the street, one wonders if all of them have actually voted.
Voter turn out in most elections is just around 50%.
And elections, at least to date, I don't think are an attestation of the winners' worth. I hope things will change, but am unsure if we will look at the attitude of representatives and concede we are part of the problem.