Capture People's minds - 05 Aug 2002
Dear Friends,
We had a good meeting with activists and political parties in Chennai
on 4th August (Sunday). 8 political parties
participated. The major ones -DMK, ADMK, MDMK, and PMK did not participate.
CPM, Congress / TMC,
BJP, JP etc were there.
There was a good follow up meeting with activists and experienced lawyers
and administrators. Several useful
ideas emerged. But first, some perspectives for generating wide public
debate, and sensitizing the media.
1. We are all, in a way, grateful to the political parties
for making the debate sharp and unambiguous. Often in
the past parties and governments damned reform efforts by agreeing
and never acting upon it. Now, the issue
is in black and white. And by uniting in their opposition to
full disclosures, they have also given us an invaluable
opportunity to unite across regions, languages, castes, prejudices
and political predilections. Nothing we do
collectively can match what the parties have accomplished
2a) It not about judiciary vs legislature. Every right thinking
citizen and democrat stands by Parliament in upholding
its sanctity and asserting its legislative supremacy. The legislature
comprises of our chosen representatives and any
dishonour to that august body is a dishonour to us, as a people.
But this is the wrong case and time to assert legislative supremacy.
This is a case where the Supreme Court
merely interpreted the citizen's right to know about candidates as
a fundamental right enshrined in Article 19 of
the Constitution and as a natural right flowing from the very concept
of democracy. It is Supreme Court's bounden
duty to interpret the fundamental rights of citizens and safeguard
them. Common sense and basic democratic
postulates tell us that the Court is right on this issue, and no am
b) Disclosure is not about disqualification. The government brought
in the issue of disqualification of those charged
by a magistrate with two 'heinous' offences, in two separate cases.
This is in consonance with the larger principle
enunciated by the Law Commission and Election Commission, that serious
criminal charges pending against a
person should be a ground for disqualification until the verdict is
delivered. But, irrespective of the merits of this
disqualification, the Supreme Court judgment (Ma Nor do we seek discretionary
powers to Returning Officers to
reject nominations on technical grounds. The Election Commission's
order (Para 14(4)) is clearly meant to enforce
truthful disclosures, and not to act as a judge and jury before the
election. There are enough safeguards provided in
the order. The Commission's past record shows that nominations are
not rejected on frivolous grounds, and
acceptance is the norm. However, when parties say that they cannot
trust officials posted by their own government.
However, we respect the concerns of the Parties. Accordingly,
we requested the Election Commission to suitably
amend the offending paragraph 14(4). We have also circulated a note
to political parties (enclosed) specifically
suggesting that the Returning Officers' power to verify the details
furnished can be removed by amending Rule 4
of Conduct of Election Rules, 1961. Only non-disclosure can be made
a ground for rejection, and false disclosure
can only be ground for subsequent prosecution and/or electio Let it
be understood clearly and unambiguously
that the purpose of the Bill is not to remove discretion of ROs; but
to undermine disclosure norms per se. The heart
of the draft Bill is in its section 4 (proposed section 33 A in RP
Act, 1951). It is worthwhile quoting the provision in
full, because people and media need to understand the issue in perspective.
" 33 A. Notwithstanding anything contained in any judgment, decree or
order of any court or any direction, order or
any other instruction issued by the Election Commission, no candidate
shall be liable to disclose or furnish any such
information, in respect of his election, which is not required to be
disclosed or furnished under this Act or the rules
made there under."
c) Disclosure provisions are not meant to harass politicians
charged with purely political offences while participating
in protests - "trespass into public property", "violation of prohibitory
orders" etc. All that the people need to know is the
nature of offences pending. To be doubly sure that candidates are not
put to inconvenience, there can be a simple
disclosure of all charges pending (framed by a magistrate) in respect
of all offences listed under section 8 of the RP
Act, 1951. Such an amendmentd It is equally vital that politicians
should respect the wishes of the people whom they
seek to represent. Nobody can deny that in a democracy the public opinion
is everything. We all say 'Janata
Jaanardan', 'Vox Populi, Vox dei', 'People are the sovereigns'. The
faceless people all over the country are now saying,
'we have a right to know about our candidates'. Several surveys , including
that by CMS, have shown that over 75%
people want disclosures. Most of the rest have no opinion since they
have not pa 3. Then what is disclosure about?
It is about people's fundamental right to know about their candidates,
as an extension of Art 19 (freedom of speech
and expression) and Art 21 (Protection of personal liberty) of the
Constitution. It is not a right granted by law or
decree,and Parliament or any other body has no power to take it away.
This right to be informed about the candidates
is a natural right flowing from the very concept of democracy.
Disclosure is an essential prerequisite for aware and active citizenship.All
parties, civil society activists and media tell
people that they should be active and informed citizens. Disclosure
is but one tool forsuch civic engagement.
The arrangement that people already know who is what, and yet are voting
criminals and corrupt persons into office is
both irresponsible and unacceptable. Politicians are not to judge people'
verdicts. People are the judges of politicians. Disclosure and public
exposure of the antecedents of candidates will force attention on the quality
of candidates. Even
if it has a 5% bearing on voting preferences, it is a gain to democracy.
It is not anybody's case that disclosure is a
panacea to all our ills. It is Experience of Lok Satta shows that disclosure
and public debate strengthens the decent
elements in parties and politics. Once there is public exposure of
the candidates' background, parties will look for
clean candidates without any taint of criminality and corruption. Established
politicians with criminal record may continue
to be nominated, but fear of public exposure will surely force parties
to refrain from accepting known corrupt and
criminal elements, or those with undisclosed and ill-gotten wealth
4. Why are parties afraid of disclosures? The
heart of the problem is not disclosure of criminal records. Nor is
disclosure of educational qualification the key issue,
or relevant issue. Disclosure of assets and liabilities is the heart
of the problem. Parties and politicians are forced to
spend vast sums for elections. Most of this expenditure is undisclosed,
unaccounted and illegitimate. Parties and
candidates are sucked into a vicious cycle and are afraid of the consequences
of public exposure.
It is widely reported that in Saidapet Assembly byelection in Tamil
Nadu several crores of rupees were spent
recently. In Kankapura byelection, it is widely believed that a sum
well in excess of Rs 10 crores was spent. In
Andhra Pradesh, byelections in Vuyyur, Medak and Siddipet cost over
2 - 3 crores each. Excess expenditure to
buy votes, distribute liquor, hire hoodlums and bribe officials is
increasingly the norm in elections in many
pockets of India. Parties feel helpless because they see no way out.
Financial disclosure does not seek to embarrass
the honest elements who have legitimate sources of income and accountable
wealth. In fact, disclosures will reveal
many anomalies. The honest tax payers and those with legitimate sources
of income will he revealing their assets,
though their life styles are frugal. Those with endless supplies of
cash and lavish styles will reveal very few assets,
and show practically 'nil' incomes. The revelation is not the issue;
the key is the gap between what is disclosed Already
there are many comments in the media about disclosure of sizeable (by
Indian standards) assets of known honest
politicians, and minimal assets and incomes declared by politicians
with lavish lifestyles and benami 'assets'. It is such comparison which
will force transparency, and slowly make a dent in the culture of undisclosed
transactions and
black money.
There is nothing new in the above paragraphs. I just thought I should
put together some of the arguments together,
taking into account the comments made and apprehensions expressed in
several quarters over the past few
weeks.
Now, the real question is, what do we do? On the basis of the
innumerable mails received over the past few days,
several conversations with activists all over the country, and the
detailed strategy session we had in Chennai, here
are some of the specific action points:
1. The legal briefs for submission to the President should
be ready by 7th August. Could Dr Bhaskara Rao and
Sri Promod Chawla work with Ms Kamini Jaiswal and Sri Sanjay Parikh
and get them ready. We need two
briefs:
a) The case for the President to return the Bill
with a message to Parliament Under Art 111.
b) The case for consulting the Supreme Court
under Art. 143. Justice Rajendar Sachar may please
be consulted, his
guidance may be sought.
2. A meeting will be sought with the President. We need the names
of about 10 distinguished citizens who will
present a memorandum. The date of meeting may be around 12th
or 13th August. By that time the legal briefs
should be ready in all respects.
Dr Bhaskara Rao and Gen. Vinod Saighal may kindly think of suitable
names of persons and communicate to me at
the earliest. We need to send the names to the President's office in
advance. Once the list is finalised, we need to
consult them and obtain their consent. Justice Rajendra Sachar, Sri
Kuldip Nayar, Sri LC Jain, Admiral Tahiliani,
Sti BG Deshmukh, Gen. Saighal, and Dr Bhaskara Rao are some of the
obvious names. Dr PM Bhargava (former
Director, CCMB), who also knows the President, has volunteered.
The above are the specific action points on the
legal and Constitutional fronts.
If the Bill does become law, finally the real battle has to be to capture
people's minds, and mobilize them into action.
The past three months'media coverage has awakened about 25 - 30% of
the population. The fact that all parties have
joined hands to undermine disclosures has made a deep impact on people's
minds. Now we need to reach more people,
and make them express their views in a tangible manner. The following
are the specific suggestions which came up for
mass action:
1.. Spread the idea of wearing a badge / displaying a bumper
sticker in favour of disclosures - same colour, size
and similar, simple message in
local languages all over the country. Dr Krishnaswamy of Chennai
promised to
send the modules within 2 days.
Ms Tara Sinha, Dr Bhaskara Rao, Ms Maja Daruwala and others may help
as
in finalizing the designs
and popularizing them.
2.. Lok Satta's ballots have had a wide impact in district towns.
A small ballot box ( or any other sealed box with
suitable opening, and slips of paper
- green for yes, and red for no) can be installed with local publicity,
and
people asked to register their
views through a ballot - Do they want full disclosure of
candidates' details, or
not. The results, with seals opened
and ballots counted in the presence of media, should be widely publicized.
3.. Public meetings with street theatr - using Sri LC Jain's model of
blind-folded voters being asked to vote for
candidates, of whom they have no knowledge,
and consequences - in as many small towns as possible.
4.. A massive email and SMS message campaign - each recipient
sending to 10 more persons in favour of
disclosures. Once the traffic in messages
reaches a critical mass, a lot of debate will ensue and sensitize
many more people. The messages must be brief,
simple and succinct. They should link disclosures with clean
politics, fight against corruption and electoral
reforms. Ms Tara Sinha, Dr Bhaskara Rao and Dr Krishna
Swamy may kindly help us with the messages, their
designing and replication.
5.. Village level meeting in select panchayats - particularly
medium to large villages - with street theatre.
Villagers will make a declaration and take
a pledge, "No disclosure No vote'. This is not a call for boycott
of polls. The message is, irrespective
of law, we will vote only for those candidates who come forward with
full disclosures - including financial details.
Such pledges can be taken in all public meetings wherever they
are held- rural or urban.
6.. Once the Bill does because law, protest demonstrations all over,
with one simple activity - burning the Act.
The grounds for such rejection of the Bill
are - it is violative of our fundamental rights guaranteed
by the
constitution; it is detrimental to the
spirit of democracy and citizens sovereignty. This is a perfectly
constitutional act of dissent. At all
times we should invoke the constitution in our opposition to this
law.
Such a visible protest is a tangible action
which will enthuse a ...
8.. All civil society organizations will seek candidate
details in any election due now - local, state or national, and
demand full disclosure. Such
disclosures will be publicized, and people appealed to vote only for
those who
disclose all details.
9.. Efforts should continue to persuade other SECs to enforce disclosure
norms in full in all local government
elections.
10.. We will prepare badges, posters, banners, slogans etc - as
many as possible and popularize them. Some
will be made carefully
and distributed. Local organizations can replicate the models in
local languages.
11.. Two or three public broadcasting messages will be prepared
in English and Hindi for telecasting. Lok Satta
will take the responsibility
of getting them ready and distributing to national campaign activists all
over the country.
Local activists may use
their good offices to get free air time in public interest. These
will be of about 30 seconds
duration each. They may
be dubbed into local languages where required.
12.. After preparing the ground fully, and mobilizing public opinion,
we will launch a mass protest marked by a
one-week's fast by several
hundred activists in Delhi and State capitals all over the country.
Thousands of others
can join in short fasts. The idea
is serious enough action to stir the conscience of the nation, while
not resorting to
unnecessary bravado like indefinite
fast. The focus will be on electoral reform as the key to corruption,
and
disclosure as the first necessary
step. We need to T.
With warm regards
Jayaprakash Narayan
National Cordinator
Lok Satta
401/408 Nirmal Towers
Dwarakapuri Colony, Punjagutta
Hyderabad - 500 082
Tel: 040 3350778/3350790
Fax: 040 3350783
E-mail: loksatta@satyam.net.in
url: www.loksatta.org
_______________________________________________________________________________________
It is good to note that an all-party meeting was held on July 8 to discuss
electoral reforms. In a democracy, the primacy
of political process and supremacy of parliament must be universally
respected and strengthened. The strident criticism
of political activity and revulsion of politics exhibited unthinkingly
by some is a source of great concern to true lovers of
liberty and defenders of democracy.
We believe what India needs is more politics, not less; and more democracy,
not less. Political parties are the most vital instruments for involving
people in political action, and therefore our effort should be to strengthen
them and make them
more effective. The many concerned citizens who are distancing themselves
from politics need to be engaged in political process. Above all, we should
work towards enhancing legitimacy of the democratic process by simple,
practical,
effective reforms.
All the major political parties have been expressing deep concern about
electoral reforms. Many committees and experts
have studied the subject. The Election Commission is doing its best
to uphold the sanctity of our electoral process. But a
lot more remains to be done. Voter registration is still flawed, and
studies indicate many eligible voters’ names are missing,
and ineligible names find place in electoral rolls. This can be corrected
by making voter registration simpler, more people-
friendly and accessible by utilizing the local post offices as a nodal
agency. Similarly polling irregularities, which are still common, can be
curbed by simple steps. Political parties ought to be strengthened by amendments
to X schedule of the Constitution, and effective checks against defections,
even as the members legitimate right to dissent is respected. Internal
democratic norms in parties should be revitalized and more and more people
must be attracted to play a meaningful role
in political process. Representational legitimacy needs to be enhanced
by providing for general elections based on party
platform and party lists. Parties and candidates are starved of legitimate
funds for political activity. We need to strengthen
their hands by providing tax incentives to political contributions,
strengthening disclosure norms promoting transparency,
and providing for public funding in a verifiable and fair manner. All
these and other reforms are crying for attention.
These are obviously the deep concerns of politicians whose hard work
and commitment are sustaining our democratic
process and defending our liberty. Fortunately, we also have several
non-partisan and public spirited organizations all
over the country who are committed to this cause of strengthening democracy.
Association for Democratic Reforms (Ahmedabad), AGNI (Mumbai), Common Cause,
Lok Seva Sangh, Partners in Change (Mumbai), Tranparency
International, CYSD (Bhubaneswar), Public Affairs Center (Bangalore),
Catalyst Trust (Chennai), Parivartan, Centre
for Media Studies, Concerned Citizens for Calcutta, PUCL, C.H.R.I,
Citizens’ Alliance for Promotion of Responsive Governance, Women’s Political
Watch, Lok Satta (Hyderabad) and many other organizations are forming a
broad
coalition to further this cause. Several jurists, experts, administrators
and activists are also involved in this process.
Ultimately, the success of the democratic process depends on our respecting
the right of the voter to full information about
the background of individual candidates. We would like to emphasize
that this right of citizens to know is declared as fundamental right as
enshrined in article 19 of the constitution
The Supreme Court also held that the right to get information in democracy
is a natural right flowing from the concept of democracy. “The little man
in this country would have the basic elementary right to know the full
particulars of (the)
candidate who is to represent him in Parliament where laws to bind
his liberty and property may be enacted”. Such
disclosure will only strengthen the political process and help to weed
out corrupt and criminal elements from making a
way into legislatures which are the custodians of our Constitution.
The all-party meeting raised a few pertinent questions about the process
of obtaining information and disclosing it. We
maintain that the right of citizens to know about the candidates’ antecedents
and other relevant details is non-negotiable. However, we recognize the
legitimate concerns of legislators regarding dangers of frivolous rejection
of nominations. In
the past fifty years’ record of elections for state and national legislatures,
not even 10 cases of frivolous rejection of
nominations can be cited. However, there can be further safeguards
to prevent the Returning Officers from acting as
“unguided missiles”in the hands of partisan politicians. The Election
Commission can be asked to frame precise and
verifiable guidelines. In the unlikely event of frivolous rejection
of a nomination, there can be a quick remedy of Election Commission’s intervention
under Article 324, based on a report by the District Election officer.
A brief note which should dispel the reservations and apprehensions about disclosure norms is enclosed.
The people of India look up to you, the political parties and public
representatives for leadership and direction to defend
liberty, strengthen democracy and respect people’s sovereignty. We
most earnestly urge you to take this opportunity to
fortify electoral reforms which shield our legislatures from persons
of dubious background, strengthen our democracy
and enhance popular respect for the political process.
___________________________________________________________________________________________