Strengthen Indian democracy
Hazare told the government: "We are the maliks, you are the sevaks."
Minister, of course, is Latin for servant. Sensing that the nation was increasingly outraged over corruption and nepotism, Rahul Gandhi told an election rally: "I am your naukar; you are my malik." It could have been Anna Hazare speaking.
Lokpal Bill is a powerful bill. First it provides power. A tough, independent Lokpal body will be a law unto itself - a super-cop or extra-constitutional prime minister's office. Removal - by the Supreme Court - of any Lokpal member, including the Lokpal himself, on specific charges of wrongdoing, is already part of the draft Jan Lokpal Bill. Second is the size. The proposed Lokpal has 11 members. Third is the mode of selection.. The Jan Lokpal draft Bill suggests "advertisements" to invite recommendations from the public of candidates of "unimpeachable integrity", followed by public feedback, vetting, videotaped interviews and so on. The process of selection must be as transparent and broad-based as possible. Fourth is the provision of police status. The draft Bill gives the Lokpal the power to issue search warrants. A better way forward would be to depute officers of the anti-corruption investigation department of the CBI to work under the Lokpal's direct control.
Lokpal can be the architecture of political reforms to improve governance. We need to make the CBI autonomous of the executive. Also there should be wide-ranging police reforms. The Judicial Standards and Accountability Bill will also come up in the monsoon session of Parliament. For citizens, once the Bill is passed, justice will be swifter and fairer. Electoral reforms would then be the next milestone. A candidate facing criminal prosecution in a trial court should be barred from standing for election. This will filter out a majority of rogue candidates. We need to clean up our Parliament, our assemblies and other elected chambers. The modified Jan Lokpal Bill is one instrument to do that. An autonomous CBI is another. A strong, transparent judiciary is a third. A vigilant media and engaged civil society is a fourth. Right to Information (RTI) Act, the Right to Education (RTE) Act and now the Right to Food (RTF) Act and the Right to Recall are the other needs.
The right to recall an elected politician before his term ends should be made a fundamental democratic right.
Thus the Right to Recall along with the RTI, RTE and RTF are what is needed to strengthen Indian democracy. The Lokpal is the beginning of real change.
What's wrong with euthanasia?
What's wrong with passive euthanasia which means terminating the lives of the incurably ill who are no longer conscious or capable of acting on their own?
There was one case. A female was stricken by an irreversible and fatal disease that attacks the auto-immune system and for which there is no known cure. The diagnosis had been made too late to try alternative therapies which might have deferred the inevitable. The patient went into a coma and was taken to a hospital.
The moment she was admitted into the hospital, the patient, in effect, ceased to be a human individual with human attachments of family and loved ones and became instead the property of a team of medical specialists. No longer conscious of where she was or what was happening to her, she was put into an intensive care unit which no one could enter except those who were treating her. She could be seen through a glass pane, attached to mechanical devices which took over from her the business of existence: the breathing of the lungs, the beating of the heart, the circulation of blood, the intake of nutrition. She became a machine, linked to other machines.
Regular as clockwork the attendant team of specialists would look in on the patient. Literally look in. Open the door, look at her from the doorway, make a note on clipboards they were carrying and go away. It was a large team and day by day it seemed to get larger. They were a team of doctors who consisted of dietician, dermatologist etc.
Each time these specialists would look in on her, the visit would be put on the bill which was daily growing bigger.
The family was reasonably well off. But how long could they afford to keep the patient in the hospital? One month? Two? A year? There were other expenses to meet. Doesn't the patient in such a case deserve to undergo mercy killing or euthanasia?
Parliament should legislate on the ethics of euthanasia. A human being should not be allowed to exist like a vegetable. That's not ethical!
The state of our Parliament today
Following a Supreme Court ruling, the Election Commission has required since 2002 that all candidates contesting election to either House of Parliament or state legislature file an affidavit open for examination by the voters. The affidavit must furnish full information on the candidate's educational qualifications, assets, liabilities, past convictions or acquittals in criminal cases and any pending charges stemming from offences punishable with imprisonment for two or more years. The information so generated offers an unusual peek into the qualifications of those governing us.
Here are some fascinating facts about our leaders. Lok Sabha members enjoy a remarkably high level of intellectual accomplishment. Out of 543 members, 260 have post-graduate, higher or technical degrees. An additional 157 have undergraduate degrees. Thus, four in five members now have an undergraduate or higher degree.
To the credit of Indian democracy, education is not a barrier to entering politics. There were as many as 134 candidates with no formal education whatsoever who contested the 2009 Lok Sabha election. Though none won the election, five managed to score enough votes to be among the top four candidates in their respective constituencies. Furthermore, the current Lok Sabha does include 15 members with formal education not exceeding 5th grade.
Members of the current Lok Sabha are a wealthy lot. They are either multi millionaires or crorepatis. Those with minimal wealth do participate in elections in large numbers even though their success rate is low. Two out of every five candidates in the 2009 election had wealth below Rs 5 lakh. Of these, 14 won the election.
The shocking news is the presence of a large number of members with criminal cases pending against them in the parliament. The proportion of those with one or more criminal cases registered against them is 14% among candidates but 30% among the elected members. Thus, the victory rate is higher among the accused than among "clean" candidates. Detailed data show a steadily rising trend of victory rate as we move from groups of candidates with no accusations to those with a larger and larger number of cases registered against them.
The question is should uneducated, undereducated and criminal ones be allowed to be the members of such a sacred institution called Parliament?
We don't want criminals in our parliament
In our parliament, we have a large number of members with criminal cases pending against them. The proportion of those with one or more criminal cases registered against them is 14% among candidates but 30% among the elected members. Thus, the victory rate is higher among the accused than among "clean" candidates. Detailed data show a steadily rising trend of victory rate as we move from groups of candidates with no accusations to those with a larger and larger number of cases registered against them.
Why did so many candidates with serious criminal cases pending against them win the election? Probably in the constituencies they contested, all major candidates had such cases pending against them, thus, leaving the voters little choice. But there were cases where candidates with serious charges faced candidates with no charges whatsoever against them and yet they won.
The candidates facing serious criminal cases also happen to be wealthy. They can buy both social status and a ticket from a major party. In addition, these candidates have connections right till top.
If such candidates are given entry in the parliament they are bound to adopt policies that will prove to be detrimental to the national interest.
There is clear need for the media and NGOs to keep a close watch on such members of parliament lest they might do something that is against national interest. Candidates and members with serious criminal charges create a serious dilemma. Since they have committed crimes they must be barred from contesting elections. Even those who have charges of serious crimes made against them and whose cases are pending in the court should be barred from contesting elections.
As India moves towards global power status, it must undertake judicial, legal and electoral reforms that would resolve this key dilemma and pave the way for the emergence of a parliament with integrity that would command the respect of people at home and make us proud abroad.
Hazare told the government: "We are the maliks, you are the sevaks."
Minister, of course, is Latin for servant. Sensing that the nation was increasingly outraged over corruption and nepotism, Rahul Gandhi told an election rally: "I am your naukar; you are my malik." It could have been Anna Hazare speaking.
Lokpal Bill is a powerful bill. First it provides power. A tough, independent Lokpal body will be a law unto itself - a super-cop or extra-constitutional prime minister's office. Removal - by the Supreme Court - of any Lokpal member, including the Lokpal himself, on specific charges of wrongdoing, is already part of the draft Jan Lokpal Bill. Second is the size. The proposed Lokpal has 11 members. Third is the mode of selection.. The Jan Lokpal draft Bill suggests "advertisements" to invite recommendations from the public of candidates of "unimpeachable integrity", followed by public feedback, vetting, videotaped interviews and so on. The process of selection must be as transparent and broad-based as possible. Fourth is the provision of police status. The draft Bill gives the Lokpal the power to issue search warrants. A better way forward would be to depute officers of the anti-corruption investigation department of the CBI to work under the Lokpal's direct control.
Lokpal can be the architecture of political reforms to improve governance. We need to make the CBI autonomous of the executive. Also there should be wide-ranging police reforms. The Judicial Standards and Accountability Bill will also come up in the monsoon session of Parliament. For citizens, once the Bill is passed, justice will be swifter and fairer. Electoral reforms would then be the next milestone. A candidate facing criminal prosecution in a trial court should be barred from standing for election. This will filter out a majority of rogue candidates. We need to clean up our Parliament, our assemblies and other elected chambers. The modified Jan Lokpal Bill is one instrument to do that. An autonomous CBI is another. A strong, transparent judiciary is a third. A vigilant media and engaged civil society is a fourth. Right to Information (RTI) Act, the Right to Education (RTE) Act and now the Right to Food (RTF) Act and the Right to Recall are the other needs.
The right to recall an elected politician before his term ends should be made a fundamental democratic right.
Thus the Right to Recall along with the RTI, RTE and RTF are what is needed to strengthen Indian democracy. The Lokpal is the beginning of real change.
What's wrong with euthanasia?
What's wrong with passive euthanasia which means terminating the lives of the incurably ill who are no longer conscious or capable of acting on their own?
There was one case. A female was stricken by an irreversible and fatal disease that attacks the auto-immune system and for which there is no known cure. The diagnosis had been made too late to try alternative therapies which might have deferred the inevitable. The patient went into a coma and was taken to a hospital.
The moment she was admitted into the hospital, the patient, in effect, ceased to be a human individual with human attachments of family and loved ones and became instead the property of a team of medical specialists. No longer conscious of where she was or what was happening to her, she was put into an intensive care unit which no one could enter except those who were treating her. She could be seen through a glass pane, attached to mechanical devices which took over from her the business of existence: the breathing of the lungs, the beating of the heart, the circulation of blood, the intake of nutrition. She became a machine, linked to other machines.
Regular as clockwork the attendant team of specialists would look in on the patient. Literally look in. Open the door, look at her from the doorway, make a note on clipboards they were carrying and go away. It was a large team and day by day it seemed to get larger. They were a team of doctors who consisted of dietician, dermatologist etc.
Each time these specialists would look in on her, the visit would be put on the bill which was daily growing bigger.
The family was reasonably well off. But how long could they afford to keep the patient in the hospital? One month? Two? A year? There were other expenses to meet. Doesn't the patient in such a case deserve to undergo mercy killing or euthanasia?
Parliament should legislate on the ethics of euthanasia. A human being should not be allowed to exist like a vegetable. That's not ethical!
The state of our Parliament today
Following a Supreme Court ruling, the Election Commission has required since 2002 that all candidates contesting election to either House of Parliament or state legislature file an affidavit open for examination by the voters. The affidavit must furnish full information on the candidate's educational qualifications, assets, liabilities, past convictions or acquittals in criminal cases and any pending charges stemming from offences punishable with imprisonment for two or more years. The information so generated offers an unusual peek into the qualifications of those governing us.
Here are some fascinating facts about our leaders. Lok Sabha members enjoy a remarkably high level of intellectual accomplishment. Out of 543 members, 260 have post-graduate, higher or technical degrees. An additional 157 have undergraduate degrees. Thus, four in five members now have an undergraduate or higher degree.
To the credit of Indian democracy, education is not a barrier to entering politics. There were as many as 134 candidates with no formal education whatsoever who contested the 2009 Lok Sabha election. Though none won the election, five managed to score enough votes to be among the top four candidates in their respective constituencies. Furthermore, the current Lok Sabha does include 15 members with formal education not exceeding 5th grade.
Members of the current Lok Sabha are a wealthy lot. They are either multi millionaires or crorepatis. Those with minimal wealth do participate in elections in large numbers even though their success rate is low. Two out of every five candidates in the 2009 election had wealth below Rs 5 lakh. Of these, 14 won the election.
The shocking news is the presence of a large number of members with criminal cases pending against them in the parliament. The proportion of those with one or more criminal cases registered against them is 14% among candidates but 30% among the elected members. Thus, the victory rate is higher among the accused than among "clean" candidates. Detailed data show a steadily rising trend of victory rate as we move from groups of candidates with no accusations to those with a larger and larger number of cases registered against them.
The question is should uneducated, undereducated and criminal ones be allowed to be the members of such a sacred institution called Parliament?
We don't want criminals in our parliament
In our parliament, we have a large number of members with criminal cases pending against them. The proportion of those with one or more criminal cases registered against them is 14% among candidates but 30% among the elected members. Thus, the victory rate is higher among the accused than among "clean" candidates. Detailed data show a steadily rising trend of victory rate as we move from groups of candidates with no accusations to those with a larger and larger number of cases registered against them.
Why did so many candidates with serious criminal cases pending against them win the election? Probably in the constituencies they contested, all major candidates had such cases pending against them, thus, leaving the voters little choice. But there were cases where candidates with serious charges faced candidates with no charges whatsoever against them and yet they won.
The candidates facing serious criminal cases also happen to be wealthy. They can buy both social status and a ticket from a major party. In addition, these candidates have connections right till top.
If such candidates are given entry in the parliament they are bound to adopt policies that will prove to be detrimental to the national interest.
There is clear need for the media and NGOs to keep a close watch on such members of parliament lest they might do something that is against national interest. Candidates and members with serious criminal charges create a serious dilemma. Since they have committed crimes they must be barred from contesting elections. Even those who have charges of serious crimes made against them and whose cases are pending in the court should be barred from contesting elections.
As India moves towards global power status, it must undertake judicial, legal and electoral reforms that would resolve this key dilemma and pave the way for the emergence of a parliament with integrity that would command the respect of people at home and make us proud abroad.
No comments:
Post a Comment