Opinion - News Analysis

Self-seeking solidarity

By Inder Malhotra

Just as China's socialism is distinctive because of its "Chinese characteristics," so democracy in this country has peculiarly Indian attributes seldom found in other democracies. A crucial one of these is the intense polarisation of the polity that is also being fragmented relentlessly along regional, religious, caste and sundry other parochial lines, sharpened often enough by implacable personal hatreds. This dangerous level of multifarious political discord has abated but rarely since the late Sixties when it began.

So much so that at times it is difficult to build a consensus even on issues involving the highest national interest. Therefore, the matter is either left in the pending tray or the Government of the day tries to push through its controversial decision one way or another. A bizarre twist to this state of affairs is that political leaders manage to thwart even that on which all of them are ostensibly agreed — for the record at least. The infamous scuttling of the Bill promising women a third of seats in every legislature is a telling case in point.

Against this backdrop it is all the more surprising that there have been a few occasions when the entire polity has united suddenly, if also briefly. Sadly, the purpose of such bouts of solidarity is almost always self-seeking, indeed crass.

Witness the loud and unanimous demand of political parties and politicians across the spectrum for a ban on opinion and exit polls during elections. There was not a single dissenting voice although some of the protagonists of the ban must have known that such an ordinance would not survive judicial scrutiny, in view of the Supreme Court's observations in 1999 when a similar prohibition was sought to be imposed. This is precisely what the Attorney-General, Soli Sorabjee, to whom the buck was passed, has said in his advice and the Union Government has accepted it. But there is no stopping the solid phalanx of raucous politicians who are asking the Election Commission to act on its own without waiting for an ordinance.

The Commission has its own problems, as it has candidly confessed to the Supreme Court. In the short time at its disposal (April 20 is the first day of voting and May 10 the last) it cannot put in place the machinery needed to vet and regulate the advertisements sought to be flashed on TV screens or splashed in newspapers. But who cares?

The United States allows its citizens to use the electronic media to advertise their messages as long as the ads are on issues, not individuals. This time around, however, an interesting problem has arisen there. In the plethora of advertisements by Democrats on such matters as the Kyoto Protocol on environment, nuclear non-proliferation in the light of startling revelations about the Pakistani nuclear scientist, A.Q. Khan, and, above all, the horrific mess made in Iraq, the dividing line between the issue and the individual (in the present case, the U.S. President, George W. Bush) has disappeared.

No wonder then the Republicans have rushed to the Federal Election Commission with what must be the strangest request in American history. Knowing that the Commission's procedures can be time-consuming, they have requested it to "reject" their complaints "out of hand" so that they can go to the courts of law! Surely, there is here a lesson for those in India who, in the absence of a blanket ban on political ads, are pining for their strict regulation by the EC.

It would also be instructive to remember the previous occasion about 18 months ago when the normally fractious political class had united. Then every single member of Parliament had stood up to reject the demand of the Election Commission, endorsed by the Supreme Court, that all candidates in elections must declare their wealth and criminal antecedents, if any.

Mercifully, this reprehensible revolt was defeated. The apex court and the EC, backed by public opinion, saw to it that the principle of every candidate filing, along with his or her nomination paper, the requisite declaration was accepted and enforced.

Newspaper reports on the declarations of their financial assets by the gladiators in the arena of electoral warfare are now regaling the country. What is not regaling anyone is the number of candidates who have had to admit to being accused of such heinous crimes as murder and kidnapping.

After the hurly-burly of the poll is over, it would be time to study these sworn affidavits and perhaps ask some searching questions. For instance, has the powerful leader who has declared assets totalling Rs. 11 crores disclosed the sources of this huge amount and how much tax has been paid on it? On the other hand, how did another important leader spend lavishly on a daughter's wedding when his entire assets, according to him, add up to only a few lakhs of rupees?

Tailpiece: "India," they are saying at New Delhi's Press Club, "is surely shining, if only because so many `sons are rising' at the same time."

© Copyright 2000 - 2009 The Hindu