news details |
|
|
| Parliamentary Democracy- Is it Going to Fail ? | | | Dr. Sanjay Kumar Bhasin
The architects of Modern India as well as the Constitution of this great country in view of its ethnic character might have thought to give Post-Independence India the shape of Parliamentary Democracy instead of Autocratic or Despotic form of government. On 26th November 1949 when we adopted, enacted and gave to ourselves the great Constitution of this country and further solemnised to Constitute India into Sovereign, Socialist, Secular, Democratic Republic might not have thought that the democracy that basically is the government of the people by the people and for the people may ultimately become government of the goons by the goon and for the goons. They also might not had thought that Money, Media & Mafia shall play major role in shaping future assemblies and parliament of this great nation.
In the initial few decades we witnessed greatest democratic leaders in Nehru, Ambedkar, Patel, Mukherjee, Lohia so on and so forth followed in line by Lal Bahadur Shastri, Indira Gandhi, Jagjeevan Ram, Charan Singh, Moorarji Desai. Later in the series were Bahuguna, Chandersekhar, V.P.Singh, Atal Bihari Vajpayee and Advani. They all remained leaders of masses achieving political heights by way of their honesty, secularist thoughts and hard work in public life with extreme sense of democratic values. Unfortunately slowly and steadily the real generation of politicians who were the face value of Parliamentary Democracy are fading away. There are very few in present generation of politicians who can be considered as having real character of true politicians of a democratic country. The success of democracy depends upon equitable wealth, proper education to each and every section of the society; people's interest in the affairs of the state and conditions for emergence of good leadership must exist uninterruptedly. Leaders should be bold, intelligent and honest. Intelligent and enlightened public opinion is must vis a vis right to vote properly without monetary and other influences. Contrary to this all; in about more than a decade now, Indian democracy is witnessing entry of Actors, Directors, Goons and Industrialists etc in the political scene as direct representatives (Lok Sabha) as well as nominated/selected (Rajya Sabha) representatives. It seems as if all the political parties big/small are adopting the policy of Money, Media and Mafia, influencing it all through well established corporate houses as the key to success to achieve political power.
If we look into the prerequisites for successful democracy like equitable wealth, proper education to each and every section of the society, the existing trends reveals that even after 70 years of independence we have failed in this aspect and still are not clear how to achieve it. The reasons may be any thing from socio-political and economic imbalances already existing in our society to lack of will at the level of incumbent governments of the day from time to time. Unfortunately, the rich is becoming rich in this country while poor remains as such. These imbalanced socio-political and economic trends coupled with unfulfilled political rhetoric are making people to lose interest in the affairs of the country that is very dangerous sign. This loss of interest can well be imagined from poll percentage that is remaining less than satisfactory election after election in almost whole country. The intellectual class of this country invariably remains disinterest in casting their vote.
In view of prevailing trends in politics like entry of economically sound and goons in the politics there are very less chances of emergence of good leadership in future. The present trend of the elections is to get party mandate by way of spending money and win the election again by spending huge amounts of money. The people with attitude of social work who want to serve the people by getting elected in Assemblies/Parliament but without money have no standing either in party folds or else. Another wrong trend is the unhealthy debates we are witnessing day in and day out the peoples representatives are showing in the Assemblies and also in the Parliament. In every sitting more and more time is wasted in inter party fights than discussing important issues that are required for progress of the Indian society and country as such. These people's representatives go up to the extent of abusing each other physically as well as verbally. All the political parties are lacking will in passing a bill thereby, restricting the entry of individuals with dubious character to enter the Assemblies/Parliament. Each party wants to through mud on the other to achieve political mileage and in the milieu general public interest issues remains in back burner.
As per the father of Indian Constitution there are three main requisites for Parliamentary system of Democracy: (i) It means negation of hereditary rule. No person can claim to be hereditary ruler that has no sanction in the Parliamentary system of Government. (ii) Any law, any measure applicable to the public must be based on the advice of the people chosen by the people. It indirectly indicates, "Law Breaker should not be the Law Maker". (iii) Parliamentary system of Democracy means that at a stated period those who want to advice the head of the state must have confidence of the people in themselves renewed. So a definite period of one Parliament has to be decided. He further said that two pillars of the Parliamentary Democracy are: a responsible & sincere opposition and free and fair elections.
Dr. Ambedkar advocated that if no notice of economic inequality is taken care of and if there is no social and economic Democracy then the Parliamentary system of Democracy will not succeed for long time. He said that social and economic Democracy is the tissue and fibres of a political democracy. He further added that bad ideology and bad organisation are also responsible for failure of political democracy. If we look into the present scenario of our Democracy, from above three pre-requisites of successful Democracy our system is fulfilling only one i.e. fixed term of the Parliament/Assembly. Otherwise hereditary rule is prevailing in form of Brother, Wife, Husband, Brother-n-law etc getting party mandates for elections if the representative dies or elevated to Parliament. As far as policy making is concerned how it is possible that the individual with dubious character will impart justice to the general public in matters of crime or else. Can we trust that an individual who will spend crores of rupees in getting elected by hook or crook will not indulge in corruption?
Babasahib Ambedkar, the architect of Constitution of India in his speech delivered on 28th October 1951 at DAV College Jalandhar said, "If Parliamentary Democracy in this country fails and it is bound to fail…., the only result will be rebellion, anarchy and communism. If the people in power do not realise that people will not tolerate hereditary authority, then this country is doomed. Either communism will come destroying individual liberty and our independence or the section of people who are disgruntled for the failure of the party in power will start rebellion and anarchy will prevail. I want you to take note of these eventual certainties and if you wish that Parliamentary system of Government and Parliamentary Democracy prevail in this country, if you are satisfied that we will be assured of our liberty of thought, speech and action, if we should preserve our independence, if we cherish the inherent right of individual liberty, then it is your duty as student, as intelligent community of our country to strive utmost to cherish this Parliamentary system of Democracy of Government in its true spirit and work for it. " How much true are the words of this great intellectual giant when we assess the situation of present Parliamentary Democracy in our country? Are we heading towards collapse of Parliamentary Democracy? This is up to common man, social workers and intelligentsia of this country to analyse and chalk out ways & means to save the Parliamentary Democracy from collapse. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
