Opinion - Letters to the Editor   

People vs parties

Sir, — The unanimity shown by the leaders of 21 registered political parties in rejecting the Election Commission norms, is `rare', no doubt, as your correspondent has qualified it (July 9), but dismaying as well for the future of a `just' democratic processes. Of course, the EC's power to reject the nomination outright, on the basis of it being not satisfied with the candidate's affidavit on his antecedents, assets, liabilities etc., may look a little high-handed for the common mind also. Acceptance or rejection should be left to the electorate. But there could not be anything objectionable in asking the candidates to swear by what they `are' and what they 'have', before those whom they seek to represent.

The political parties themselves are not people's representatives. They are supposed to represent certain lofty ideals and, as such, they can hardly be any concrete or official forces. Their objections could be valid as far as any `principle' involved in an issue is concerned. That they have unanimously resolved to take the issue to Parliament and `remote control' it raises the question whether it is the people's will or parties' wish that is fulfilled in Parliament.

R. K. Divakara,
Bangalore

Printer friendly page  
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Opinion

News: Front Page | National | Southern States | Other States | International | Opinion | Business | Sport | Miscellaneous |
Advts: Classifieds | Employment | Obituary |

Stories in this Section

• Parties and poll reforms
• Trifling with Pakistan's future
• A Prime Minister and his deputy
• Monarchy in Nepal
• Politicians close ranks
• Neo-liberalism will not suffice
• People vs parties
• Rare unanimity
• Time to unite
• Unfair to whom?
• Allies & terrorism
• A fine gesture
• A social safety net
• Prefer Bitragunta

Copyright © 2002, The Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of The Hindu