![]() Monday, Mar 24, 2003 |
| Opinion | ||
|
News:
Front Page |
National |
Southern States |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Miscellaneous |
Advts: Classifieds | Employment | Obituary | Opinion
-
Editorials
THE UNION CABINET'S decision to reintroduce (in the current session of Parliament) the Bill seeking to do away with the residency qualification for candidates contesting for a Rajya Sabha seat and also effect a switchover to open ballot as the procedure to elect its members is a patently retrograde move that is sure to erode the federal and democratic basis of the Indian Constitution. The Bill containing the notoriously undemocratic provisions was originally tabled in Parliament in its winter session in 2001 and following deep dissensions was subsequently referred to a Parliamentary Standing Committee attached to the Ministry of Home Affairs. Even this Committee failed to arrive at a consensus and the division was reflected in the report tabled in Parliament last July. The controversy over applying the residency criterion first arose in relation to the election of Manmohan Singh from Assam subsequent to his assumption of office as the Union Minister of Finance way back in 1991. The then Chief Election Commissioner, T.N. Seshan, displaying a penchant for applying the rule, sought to disqualify Dr. Singh's election on the ground that the latter was not normally resident in the State even if his name was added to the electoral rolls. Even while this was in fact the case, a reasonable reading could have been to view this not so common aberration as necessitated solely by the Government's intention (in exercise of its executive powers) to avail itself of the services of a person of eminence in the country's interest. Once such a person is inducted into the Cabinet, it becomes incumbent for him to seek election to either House of Parliament within a stipulated period of six months and it is but natural and reasonable for the party in power to field him from a safe constituency. The composition of the Rajya Sabha as the nomenclature connotes is by definition intended to give representation to the various States within the Federal Union, unlike the Lok Sabha which is essentially the House of the people, whose election is not restricted by place of domicile. Thus, the principle behind the stipulation requiring candidates seeking election to the Rajya Sabha to be ordinarily resident in the respective States is, if anything, self-evident. The few instances where there have been departures are hardly a basis for dispensing with the legitimate Constitutional stipulation. It is also arguable that not all departures from the norm have been above board and have in fact been used to bestow favours on political heavyweights. But measures as the one being contemplated by the Union Cabinet are hardly the kind of corrective for such misdemeanours. If an earlier proposal to divest the E.C. of its power to reject the nominations of errant candidates smacked of utter contempt for the authority daring to enforce the provisions in the law, the legislation to be brought before Parliament to do away with the residency requirement for elections to the Rajya Sabha is a more invidious move that will erode the democratic content of our Constitution. The other proposal, namely, to introduce an open ballot for the election of members of the Rajya Sabha to check cross-voting by members of State Legislatures is again fraught with dangerous consequences for the democratic ethos underpinning the polity and the competitive party system. The sanctity of the secret vote cannot be undermined by reason of wanting to ensure adherence to the basic norms of party discipline. Political parties, rather than grapple with issues of large-scale dissensions and indiscipline among their ranks, appear anxious to enforce loyalty even if at enormous peril to the need to adhere to the rudiments of a democratic style of functioning. Critical as it is for the very survival of the institution, loyalty to the party is best inculcated by example and the courage displayed by the leadership to stand up for convictions.
Printer friendly
page
News:
Front Page |
National |
Southern States |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Miscellaneous |
|
|
|
The Hindu Group: Home | About Us | Copyright | Archives | Contacts | Subscription Group Sites: The Hindu | Business Line | The Sportstar | Frontline | The Hindu eBooks | Home |
Copyright © 2003, The
Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of
this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of
The Hindu
|