news details |
|
|
| Politicians believe in 'Majoritarianism' rather than 'Concensusism' | | | Jamwal Mahadeep Singh
The Democratic Government
system was adopted by India on 26th of January 1950, when Constitution came into enforcement. The word 'Democratic' is the adjective form of Democracy, derived from the Greek "demokratia" meaning rule or power of the people. Democracy is governed by its most popularly understood principle: majority rule. When something is voted on, the side with the most votes wins, whether it is an election or legislative bill. So it is the majority that has the power. We are well informed that a man possessing absolute power may misuse that power against his adversaries for setting scores. Why should not a political party gaining edge in elections be liable to the same reproach? The majority (winners) would too easily dominate the minority (runners) just as a monarch is inclined to do. Here one disturbing question comes to mind that when as majority 51% have the authority to rule over 49%, are this 49% are bound to accept the decision of 51%? When decisions are made by thin majorities, the outcome may seem unfair to the 'near-majority'. Democracy is conceived today, the minority's (opposition) rights must be protected, no matter how singular or alienated that minority is from the majority. Therefore greater number cannot be the only definition of dominion in a democracy. Although it is fair that democracy guarantee the statement of the suitable mind through majority rule, it is equally clear that it must contract that the ruling majority, will not misconduct its power to disregard the elemental and un-transferable immunity of the opposition (minority). In recent years, the parties have become so polarized that the tendency has become to see the other side as fundamentally evil. So we require highly intelligent politicians having true concept of their role as rulers as well as in opposition. How the opposition was taken on board by the ruling party, only example we come across is during P.V.Narasimha Rao's tenure (PM from congress party) when Sh. Atal Bihari Vajpayee then opposition leader was sent to represent India in a 'United Nations' meeting at Geneva. But we find a unique trend of present dispensation that always glorify own self and condemn the opposition. Opposition views are not given fair play in legislations. It is assumed by politicians that once a party or coalition gains majority in Parliament or in a State Legislature, it has legal and moral rights to do so as it chooses and those in minority must acquiesce to the majority's wishes. All the political parties aspire to play a constructive role and hope to come to power, but once they assume majority to form the government, their priorities shift to self centric agenda and to set scores against their opponents. If one group is always excluded and fails to be heard, it may turn against democracy in anger and frustration. Those on musical chairs of power today forget that it is not permanent contract for ruling but this all depends upon the power of voters and dice can be reversed any time by the balloters. It is of great importance in a republic, not only to guard the society against the oppression of its rulers, but to guard one part of the society against the injustice of the other part. At its core, the success of our democracy depends on the quality of our participation and more so with a strong opposition. But we have seen from the day one that relations between opposition and rulers never remained as such to boost the character of real democracy but always of mudslinging each other. If we visit the elements that are essential for democracy, we come across that these are: choosing and replacing the government through free and fair elections, in a political system of competition for power, the active participation of the people as citizens in politics, a rule of law, in which the laws and procedures apply equally to all citizens and above all to hold their representatives accountable for their policies and their conduct in office. In Democracy, the Government is based on the consent of the governed and it is the rule of law that protects the rights of citizens. But here we are governed by those who believe in 'Majoritarianism.' We cannot forget the early start of ruling by present dispensation through ordinances, thereby negating the role of opposition in formation of legislatures. The BJP gaining majority in centre and many states is flexing its majority muscles. We come across an open letter by 65 former IAS officers from different central services in June 2017, claiming to have no affiliation with any political party but believe in the credo of impartiality, neutrality and commitment to the Indian constitution. The letter goes as: "A sense of deep disquiet at what has been happening in India has prompted us to write this open letter to chronicle our reservations and misgivings about recent developments in the body politic. What has gone wrong?" This party's 'Majorititarian' impulses have continued to show in many ways that has compelled the 65 former IAS officers as stated above to plead with the government and public institutions to curb this "rising authoritarianism and majoritarianism, which do not allow for reasoned debate, discussion and dissent
Here we have to visit the American system how it restricts majorities from running amok or becoming tyrannical. It expands the sphere of elections to include a large and varied population, so that there will be many interests but no simple majorities. But in India we never register our self in such a varied population at the voting booth. Expecting negative vote, our political parties use muscle power to stop such voters visiting the booths. The American system makes the structure and process of government complex. Through genuine separation of powers, bicameral legislature, judicial review, it makes it possible for a majority to control the entire government. The power is divided in so many ways that minority views can always find a forum for expression and an institution for action against the majority. The opposition thus has real teeth to stop a government from legislating arbitrary laws and render it action less for setting their political scores. But in India although we have a Legislature, an Executive, and a Judiciary, the division into three branches: but it is the politician that makes mockery of all the three branches. How we can forget various decisions of Apex court that were reversed by the legislature only because of majority in Parliament or Assembly. In India, it has been readily accepted by Courts that Parliament reigns over all areas of law, except for the Constitution, which is jealously guarded by the Court. Indian Constitution has provided for checks and balances, in the working of the legislature, judiciary, and the executive but from time to time all of them have infringed on the domain of the other." In view of the 'Authoritarian' aspect in 'Majoritarian' belief, it is always better to have consensuses that are a position reached by a group as a whole for a vibrant democracy. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
STOCK UPDATE |
|
|
 |
| BSE
Sensex |
 |
| NSE
Nifty |
|
|
| |
CRICKET UPDATE |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
