Opinion - Leader Page Articles

Parliamentary democracy & some challenges

India had the great benefit of starting its journey under the leadership of Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru during the defining years of its freedom, and a great line-up of visionary and sagacious men and women provided effective leadership in the task of consolidating democracy and in laying the institutional foundations of the republic. Jawaharlal Nehru, as president of the Indian National Congress, declared in 1936 that India’s ultimate objective was “the establishment of a democratic state,” a sovereign state which would promote and foster “full democracy” and usher in a new social and economic order.

Nehru was a democrat by instinct and temperament and contributed immensely towards inculcating the true parliamentary spirit and values in our people. Although he commanded absolute majority in the House, he never believed in steamrolling the Opposition and showed utmost respect to them, listened to their views and tried to accommodate them as far as possible. He recognised the due space of dissent in a true democracy, favouring healthy and constructive criticism from all sections of the House. Some of his strongest critics in Parliament happened to be his greatest admirers, and perhaps there cannot be a better compliment to Nehru’s democratic credentials than this fact. One wonders how far over the years have we tried to live up to his dreams and hopes, the fulfilment of which would have given proper respect to his outstanding leadership and personality.

Our struggle for Independence was not just a movement to achieve freedom from British rule. It was as much a crusade to free ourselves from the various social evils and socio-economic iniquities and discriminations, to lift the deprived and the downtrodden from the mire of poverty and to give them a stake in the overall transformation of the country. It was with this larger national objective that a democratic polity based on parliamentary system was established. Our founding fathers perceived that such a system would respond effectively to the problems arising out of our diversity as also to the myriad socio-economic factors that we were faced with, when we achieved freedom through a people’s movement after centuries-long humiliation of being a slave nation. With that objective, in the political system that we established, pre-eminence has been given to Parliament, the only organ directly representative of the people and as such accountable to them, with extensive powers which should rightly belong to the highest people’s forum.

To discharge its constitutional duties, it is essential that Parliament functions smoothly and by the rules of procedure devised to facilitate its orderly functioning. It is essential for MPs to follow strictly the rules of procedure and conduct themselves with the utmost sense of responsibility and with dignity and decorum. Parliamentary committees play a vital role in ensuring accountability in governance. Unfortunately, after six decades of Independence, we have come to a stage nowadays when questions are being asked about the utility and relevance of Parliament in our polity and, indeed, about the workability of our democratic set-up based on the parliamentary system.

Because of the competitive and confrontational politics that has overtaken the country today, Parliament cannot appropriately discharge its essential functions. While the public perceives a general decline in all our institutions of governance, it is Parliament and the State Assemblies that have come in, it seems justifiably, for strong criticism. Debates and discussions, the hallmarks of democracy, have been overshadowed by disruptions, confrontations and other non-democratic alternatives, which have made the institution itself a subject of ridicule, inviting public opprobrium.

It is a matter of agony for the Presiding Officers that several legislations of far-reaching importance are passed by Parliament without any serious discussion. The most glaring instance where the concept of executive accountability to Parliament is compromised is with regard to the management of the financial business of government, including the presentation, discussion and passage of the budgetary proposals, the demand for grants and others. There is a growing feeling of resentment and concern when the budget of a billion-plus people is passed without any discussion due to disruption of proceedings.

A recent study indicated that in the first three years of the 14th Lok Sabha, 26 per cent of parliamentary time has been lostdue to disruptions. During the budget session this year, the Lok Sabha lost 73 hours (34 per cent of its time) due to disorder. Only 11 of the slotted 25 Bills were passed in the monsoon session. In that session, the Lok Sabha lost 40 per cent of its time due to adjournments, and the Rajya Sabha lost 49 per cent. Four Bills were passed without discussion in the Lok Sabha. If the Lok Sabha worked 124 hours in the monsoon session of 2006, it worked only 65 hours in the monsoon session of 2007. Each minute of parliamentary time costs the public exchequer to the tune of about Rs.26,000.

Intolerance, divisiveness, corruption, confrontations and disrespect to dissent are increasingly vitiating our socio-political system. Added to this is the attempt by some institutions to malign and marginalise important people’s forums with an intent to occupy larger space than what is ideally feasible or constitutionally permissible in a representative democratic system. Judicial activism is sought to be justified because of the perceived decline in the effectiveness of parliamentary accountability. Frequent interventions in the exclusive jurisdiction of the legislature will only contribute to further eroding the authority of Parliament.

Nobody is talking of an alternative to, or substitute for, parliamentary democracy. With the realisation that it is out of our Parliament that the leadership that runs the affairs of our country emerges, we have to ensure that political workers, specially young men and women with commitment and dedication to the cause of the people, come into Parliament and actively participate in working the system. As the Presiding Officer of the popular House of Parliament, it has been my endeavour to help enhance its image. In recent years we have taken several initiatives to take Parliament closer to the people. The introduction of a full-fledged 24-hour Lok Sabha TV channel and a Parliamentary Lecture Series, the creation of various parliamentary forums to ensure more effective involvement of the people’s representatives in matters that require concerted national attention; the creation of more opportunities for MPs to have discussions and interactions with social activists, intellectuals, the academia, and so on, are all meant to ensure an effective interface between civil society and the representative body of the people.

By expelling 10 MPs for their involvement in the ‘cash-for-query’ scam, and by suspending others for different periods for various misdemeanours, Parliament has set an example. But these initiatives are not projected properly to help enhance people’s respect for democratic institutions. The media, rather than becoming the prophets of doom and contributing to the loss of the people’s faith in the institutions, should endeavour to reinforce their trust in them. They would do well to remember that only in a democracy does free media flourish. Market-driven competitive journalism will hurt the long-term interest of our political system. Once democratic institutions lose popular trust, it could very well herald the beginning of anarchy.

The cynicism that is creeping into the minds of the people, specially the youth, about our democratic structure should be removed by the proper functioning of the people’s most important institution, so that bright young citizens do not get disinterested about participation in public affairs and politics. All stakeholders in our democracy have to unitedly work with dedication, commitment, cooperation and self-discipline to find lasting solutions to safeguard parliamentary democracy from the tremendous strains experienced today and to strengthen it.

The question that we all, particularly, today’s youth, need to ask ourselves is, should we always be the beneficiaries of the system or should we not come forward to contribute to transform the quality of our polity and to make a positive impact on the socio-economic fortunes of the people. Attracting the right talent — honest, well-meaning, public-spirited and educated youth — into the arena of politics and public life is an important challenge before our democracy.

Our youth and particularly the students have to take on the onus of addressing the aberrations and for removing the various ills plaguing our society and to provide dynamic and committed leadership to change the system for the better. Politics in the country today carries with it an image of intrigue, venality, disorder and anarchy. We need to correct it urgently, so that our people begin to view politics as a respectable profession in the service of society as was perceived during the long years of our struggle for freedom. Only the youth can help correct this image. Remember that only democracy gives you the power to participate in the political process, express your opinion and thus to be a factor in bringing about positive changes in the socio-economic condition of the country.

(Based on the Jawaharlal Nehru Memorial Lecture, titled Status of Parliamentary Democracy in India, delivered by Somnath Chatterjee, Speaker of the Lok Sabha, at Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi, on November 14.)

© Copyright 2000 - 2009 The Hindu