Anna's movement has raised some fundamental questions about Indian democracy. With all humility, I first wish to counter the myth that Parliament is supreme. It is not. The people of this country are superior to Parliament. How?
PREAMBLE OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA :
"WE, THE PEOPLE OF INDIA, having solemnly resolved to constitute India into a SOVEREIGN SOCIALIST SECULAR DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC and to secure to all its citizens:
JUSTICE, social, economic and political;
LIBERTY of thought, expression, belief, faith and worship;
EQUALITY of status and of opportunity;
and to promote among them all
FRATERNITY assuring the dignity of the individual and the unity and integrity of the Nation;
IN OUR CONSTITUENT ASSEMBLY this twenty-sixth day of November, 1949, do HEREBY ADOPT, ENACT AND GIVE TO OURSELVES THIS CONSTITUTION."
In 1947, when the country became independent, there was neither a constitution, nor a Parliament but just the people of India. These people, through the Constituent Assembly, wrote a constitution. The Preamble of Constitution says: "We, the people of India, give ourselves this constitution." This Constitution then created the Parliament. Therefore, the Constitution of India is superior to Parliament and the people of India are superior to both the Parliament and the Constitution. Our Constitution puts “we, the people” above Parliament. The will of “us, the people” rests in our Parliament, elected by our votes.
In 1950, we adopted representative form of democracy. People elect their Member of Parliament for five years. He is supposed to be the "voice of his people" in Parliament.
In their own distinctive ways, the three major streams of our freedom movement, Gandhi, Netaji and Bhagat Singh, reflected the respective beliefs and ideologies, and competed in the philosophical space of nation-building. Democratic plurality, ideological diversity and argumentativeness were integral to our freedom movement. Which is the reason why, not just independence, but also such a marvellous Constitution emerged from it. Read the debates of the Constituent Assembly. The founding fathers of our nation differed, disagreed and argued with each other, but nowhere did one pull out the flag and say to the other: if you are patriotic like me, you have to agree with me.
Each word in this preamble was discussed, argued, fought over, and after much debate was included in this, arguably one of the best Constitutions ever written for any Democracy. Should we not at some time ask after 65 Years of Independence, ask if any fundamental words have been achieved? If not, is it not time, after 65 years, to stop blaming individuals or Governments. But blame the system that has usurped Indian Democracy into self serving, power hungry groups and organizations.
Now whether democracy really "by the people, of the people, for the people"? Too much power gets concentrated in the hands of a few people after elections. Between two elections, India almost becomes a dictatorship of the high command of the ruling party.
The struggle for Lokpal has thrown light on the dirty picture of our democracy. It is increasing controlled by criminals, vested crooked interests, money power etc. Electoral reforms bill which is sleeping on tables of law ministry should be passed prior to lokpal bill to save democracy. The struggle for lokpal is turning into a struggle to save our democracy.
Some of unfortunate facts relating to India. (the list can be quite long)
(1) India has the highest percentage of undernourished children in the entire world, measured in terms of the standard criteria;
(2) India spends a far lower percentage of its GNP than China on government-provided health care and has a much lower life expectancy; and
(3) India's average rank among South Asian countries — India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Nepal, and Bhutan — in the standard social indicators, varying from life expectancy and immunisation to infant mortality and girls' schooling, has dropped over the last twenty years from being second-best to second-worst (even as India has surged ahead in terms of GNP per capita).
After 65 years of the parliamentary system of course there is Justice, Equality and Dignity of the Individual. But only for those that are in a position to demand it, are in position to force it. India may be the world’s second-fastest-growing economy, but more than 400 million Indians live in poverty according to government figures, who barely manage to survive or die of malnutrition. There is no dignity and justice for the world’s largest number of poor in the world that live in India.
Is Indian Parliamentry system a slap in the face to the founding fathers of Constitution?
Let’s debate.. We need to go back to the original concepts of our Constitution.
After 65 years of the parliamentary system of course there is Justice, Equality and Dignity of the Individual. But only for those that are in a position to demand it, are in position to force it. India may be the world’s second-fastest-growing economy, but more than 400 million Indians live in poverty according to government figures, who barely manage to survive or die of malnutrition. There is no dignity and justice for the world’s largest number of poor in the world that live in India.
Is Indian Parliamentry system a slap in the face to the founding fathers of Constitution?
Let’s debate.. We need to go back to the original concepts of our Constitution.