Let us think and Act with an open mind to

Develop a Vibrant Democracy – Article 8

SRB

Introduction: I have identified thirty obstacles which cause a distorted and ineffective democracy and possible solutions for these. Because very few people have time / inclination to read long articles, these are presented in separate brief articles for pointed attention and easier assimilation. I hope this will lead to spreading of awareness and facilitating point by point debate on each of these for saving our sinking democracy.

(Please keep these articles within easy reach for referring back till the series is completed.)

Law and order

One of the most important expectations from a democracy is that people want to have a peaceful life and be allowed to carry on with their daily activities without hindrance. Sad to say, these expectations remain a woeful dream in many ways.

Rape and violence against women have rocked the whole country. An analysis by Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative showed that 2,64,130 rapes were reported between 2001 and 2013 in 28 states – an average of 56  rapes per day (Times of India dated 28-07-14, page 7). Four rapes and nine molestations were reported in Delhi every day!! (DNA dated 04-01-14). Robberies also are daily features. Murders are not far behind, that too of senior citizens. Police are not only ineffective but also callous. When rich and influential persons are involved in crime police tend to take their side. Quite often, when police somehow mange or are forced to file cases against rich and influential persons, the latter threaten witnesses, use delaying tactics and get away without punishment for lack of evidence. To overcome these, Supreme Court (SC) has said that immediate steps need to be taken to ensure protection  of witnesses who often turn hostile  due to threats or other corrupt practices (DNA dated 15 - 11-13 page 9). But, the situation seems to be the same.

Police have earned a reputation of being corrupt in dealing with problems faced by people. Most people are afraid to go to a police station with a genuine complaint. Filing of FIR is subject to the whims of the police or the pressures they face. Burking of crime is so common that every year about 60 lakh cases are not registered (The Hindu dated 13-11-13, page 13). A general impression is that persons with money can get away with any crime. Even worse, SC was constrained to remark that policemen are like “criminals in uniform” (Deccan Chronicle dated 14-10-12). Even this castigation from the highest level of law could not produce results. Continuation of this state of affairs in 2013 is confirmed by a Chief Minister of a state stating: “It’s no surprise that people think twice before visiting a police station. They are scared to talk to the police.”  “How can anyone expect justice from police when they are so corrupt and indulge in illegal activities?” (Deccan Chronicle dated 14-06-13, page 3)

In a TV discussion, a former police commissioner bluntly stated that police have now become an “armed militia of the politicians in power.” (Deccan Chronicle dated 06-02-13, page 8). “Today, our political leaders not only want the police to do their dirty work but also get them to collect money for them.” “At the centre, the Intelligence Bureau furthers the interests of the ruling party and the Central Bureau of Investigation has been reduced to being a “caged parrot”, (as remarked by SC). “We not only need to free the police from the malignant  and suffocating political control but also streamline its organization to ensure a people friendly and highly efficient and effective police force.” (Deccan Chronicle dated 22-05-13, page 9)

In connection with a PIL which alleged that 1,17,480 children had gone missing between January 2008 and January 2010 and of them 41,546 were yet to be traced, SC remarked that “No body seems to be concerned about missing children. This is the irony.” (Deccan Chronicle dated 06-02-13, page 1).

All these  show that most people are very unhappy with police who are like “criminals in uniform” and “armed militia of the politicians”.

Elected representatives of people often close their eyes to all these dreadful realities and allow matters to drift. “Like any democracy, we have all the laws. But we don’t have the courage, the competence or the candour to implement them.” (The Week dated 09-06-13). What is worse and cruel, some of these representatives seek personal benefits from this anarchy or even create such situations for their selfish gains. There are many instances of lawmakers taking law into their hands and demonstrating their contempt for law. They do not realize that not only are they causing harm but they are also setting bad examples as leaders. This has led to their supporters also taking law into their hands without fear of punishment. Children of politicians also indulge in unlawful activities and escape punishment.

Apathy and callous  attitude of the Government, even when multiple failures in law and order are highlighted by media every day, are conspicuous and have resulted in loss of trust on the government.

All these have made people unhappy, frustrated and cynical.

One reason for this state of affairs is acute shortage of police officials (policemen and officers). There are only 106 policemen for one lakh people, which is even less than half of the recommended ratio of 222 (Times of India dated 23-02-14). Government has been callous and has not taken adequate steps to overcome such gross shortages of police officials, even though this would have benefited people and reduced unemployment also. This is due to low priority and not lack of resources. Inability to ensure that more recruitment will not create more criminals in uniform can be a possible reason for hesitation!!

What makes the shortage even more alarming is that available police officials are frequently misused or deputed for non-governmental activities e.g., 700 constables, 120 SHOs and 35 DySPs were put on duty for the marriage of a top politician’s daughter, which pertinently was a vulgar display of wealth with Rs. one crore being spent on the main dais alone (CNN IBN news on 3-11-12). Moreover, police yielding to external pressures is all too common. Such misuses are callously rampant. As a result, “In India, there are three policemen for every VIP and just one for every 8,000 people” (DNA dated 08-02-13, page 1). Even after SC passed strictures about this, hardly any serious actions are visible.

Democracy also requires equality in application of laws. Violations of this requirement are far too common. Poor people hardly benefit from the law and order machinery. In fact, they are even afraid of the protectors of law. No committed efforts have been made to rectify matters.

Faced with the decay in the functioning of police, a National Police Commission was set up to recommend reforms. This Commission made many important recommendations. But, these were put in cold storage despite the directions issued by SC.

These aspects depict the thirteenth obstacle which resulted in a distorted and ineffective democracy.

To overcome this obstacle, a thorough review has to be conducted by an impartial body to ascertain the reasons for this obstacle which affects people all over the country. Government should take immediate action on the basis of this review.  Moreover, immediate action has to be taken to recruit and train sufficient number of police personnel and ensure that they function effectively without hindrance from others. This matter is so important for the welfare of the people that adequate budget has to be provided by preventing wastages and by cutting down the budget for projects which are less important for the welfare of people, if necessary. For this a change in mindset and commitment are essential.

Often people are punished on the ground that ignorance of law is no excuse. This shows ignorance of realities. The vast majority of people are not aware of all the laws. Even experienced lawyers and judges have to repeatedly refer to the law books, showing that even they are not fully aware of the laws. Further they often differ in the interpretation of law showing that the laws are not clear even to them. Then, why do we expect that the common man will know all the laws and their sections and sub sections? Therefore, how can we justify punishment for ignorance of law? Particularly so when even law makers and influential persons get away after breaking laws and only common people are punished?

The above aspect depicts the fourteenth obstacle which resulted in a distorted and ineffective democracy.

To overcome this obstacle, the crimes should be classified into the following three categories:

(1) Crimes deserving punishment because these are commonly recognized as against law by the society e.g., murder, rape, theft, cheating etc. For this ignorance of law is no excuse.

(2) Crimes which are not likely to be known as against law by all people in the society and was committed because of this ignorance of law. For this only a warning is sufficient for the first offence. Repetition should be punished

(3) Crimes deserving punishment because there is reason to believe that it was committed despite the awareness that it was prohibited by law. This includes a second offence under (2) above, a politician taking the law into his hands, violence attempted by groups to break the law to show protests etc.

If instances of (2) above because of ignorance of law are too many, these should be investigated to find out which laws are not clearly known to the people more often. An education campaign should be carried out to reduce ignorance of these laws. If necessary, these laws should be modified to make these unambiguous and clear.  

An expert body should make a thorough study of all existing laws to weed out those which are obsolete and to modify the remaining laws to reduce differing interpretations by judges and lawyers and to make these understandable to people.

Comments (especially those which point out errors or deficiencies, if any, in this article and thereby help to improve it) and suggestions to overcome this very serious obstacle are welcome. Please send these to StartRemovingBlocks@gmail.com. I shall make use of all befitting suggestions to prepare the last two articles of this series – Articled 23 will spell out the basic principles which will guide formulation of the revised system of democracy and Article 24 will outline the revised system of democracy for public debate to arrive at a consensus.

You can help to save our sinking democracy by making as many people as possible aware of these obstacles and possible solutions, through personal group discussions, newspaper articles, e-mail and social media like face book and twitter so that we can have healthy debates and arrive at some innovative ideas to save our sinking democracy.

Let us think and Act with an open mind to

Develop a Vibrant Democracy – Article 7

SRB

Introduction: I have identified thirty obstacles which cause a distorted and ineffective democracy and possible solutions for these. Because very few people have time / inclination to read long articles, these are presented in separate brief articles for pointed attention and easier assimilation. I hope this will lead to spreading of awareness and facilitating point by point debate on each of these for saving our sinking democracy.

(Please keep these articles within easy reach for referring back till the series is completed.)

Management infrastructure

It is a matter for serious concern that the management infrastructure, consisting of ministers and government officials at all levels, has some basic faults.  One such basic fault arises from ignoring the indisputable fact that most efficient governance can be provided  only by professionally qualified and experienced persons, without hindrance from persons without the required qualifications (For details refer to “Illogical positioning” in Article 6). As concluded therein, “All departments carrying out professional services should be headed by professionals who should be given training in management to organize effective professional services. In addition, they should be assisted by qualified administrators for tackling problems in administration within the department” Some other basic faults are discussed below.

Drafting of policies and projects, their implementation after approval by Parliament (when relevant) and carrying out other functions of governance (including services to the people) are done by the management infrastructure. To sustain a vibrant democracy, ministers and all  officials at all levels of this infrastructure should have proper perceptions about (a) democracy and (b) different aspects of management of democracy and a mind set to comply with democratic principles. It is beyond any doubt that if there is no uniformity in the perceptions and mind set within the infrastructure it cannot function as a well-knit unit with full focus on democracy. Disruptions and working at cross purposes are bound to occur frequently and smooth functioning of governance cannot be achieved. Sad to say, no specific efforts have been made to create these basic requirements among ministers and all officials so that they can work in unison. Only an objective study in detail and implementation of its recommendations can help to develop these basic requirements of perceptions and mind set among all members of management infrastucture.

In this context, an idea about the perceptions and mind set of government officials can be obtained by asking some of them, after assuring them of confidentiality, why they prefer a government job. It is likely that the most common reply will be that they feel assured of having a good salary, can work leisurely, enjoy number of holidays and have the security of a pension, all unlike in a common private job – exposing a completely selfish mind set without idealism.

If pressed further about their leisurely work, the truly honest among them may admit that by delaying work they can enjoy people running after them saying “sir”, “sir” and paying some money under the table – exposing an unworthy mind set.

It is very likely that no one will give a reply which includes that they like to work for a democratic government which focuses on development and welfare of people – exposing lack of the required perception and mind set.

Even if a few give a proper type of reply, complete absence of proper perception and mind set among majority of officials is obvious. It is likely that most of the ministers also do not have proper perceptions and mind set. These deficiencies prevent management infrastructure functioning as a well-knit unit with full focus on democracy. This is the second basic fault which is continuing only because no one has questioned it.

When senior officers, after a thorough study of all aspects of any subject based on their long experience, submit (a) drafts of policies or projects and (b) solutions to problems of infrastructure or administration, to the minster for approval, quite often these are modified or rejected by the minster in an unconvincing dictatorial manner to uphold party interests or selfish interests or vested interests. This decision making practice makes a mockery of our officer selection system in which some of the best and energetic minds in the country are selected through competitive examinations and interviews and given long training!! This practice of allowing influence of extraneous factors to score over merit is the third basic fault which is continuing because no one has questioned it.

The above mentioned obviously dishonest and dictatorial practices destroy the belief of all the concerned officers of the department in honest functioning, in addition to belittling their expertise and much longer experience compared to those of the minister. As a result, many of them lose their sense of commitment and / or become cynical - both detrimental to efficient functioning. Even worse, some of them are tempted or forced by circumstances to form a nexus with the minster for undemocratic and non-transparent activities. These result in misgovernance and even many scams. This fourth basic fault of destruction of belief in honest functioning and belittling of expertise is continuing only because these have not been questioned.

Moreover, management infrastructure is not people friendly and has developed arrogance and a negative approach in using their powers. This has put spokes in almost all activities for development and welfare of people. The resultant red tape has given a bad name for the bureaucracy in the country. Even worse, when tackling any problem faced by people, an arrogant and negative attitude of denial of help to people has been all pervasive in a government for the people!! People, whose welfare is of utmost importance in a democracy, have been ironically made to run from pillar to post with anxiety for months. This is the fifth basic fault which is continuing though this approach has received some criticism.

Curbs on positive actions to safeguard democracy are also quite common in the guise of enforcing punitive discipline to harass honest officers. This has been supplemented by an environment of fear and subservience which cloud proper performance. Officers who were honest and sincere have found themselves sidelined and feel discouraged.

Due to various reasons including scope for amassing wealth, lack of transparency has increased. Rules and a protective approach stood in the way of taking deterrent actions against those indulging in such activities. Even more shocking, some dishonest officers have been given promotions or choice postings!! This situation has emboldened many officers to continue to misuse their powers and indulge in undemocratic and non-transparent activities, besides amassing more wealth. This is the sixth basic fault which is continuing though these facts have led to criticism.

About 66% of the IAS officers had very short average tenures of 18 months or less, 24% between 18 months to two years and only 10% more than two years (Times of India dated 01-01-14). This was detrimental to efficient governance because a minimum tenure of two years is required to do justice to any job and about 90% officers did not have it. This has resulted in development and welfare of the people getting sidelined or even ignored. What made it alarming was that frequent transfers were generally made as punishment to honest officers, with some officers being transferred 40 times or more!! The message of encouraging dishonesty is loud and clear.

This is the seventh basic fault which is continuing though these facts have led to criticism.

These demoralizing brief tenures could not have been productive; more so because these harassed officers would not have been in a mood to put in their best efforts. There were also instances of 52 transfers in 31years, 50 in 36 years and 46 in 30 years, in which the officers did not have time even to settle down!! How can they have mental peace to do good productive work? The absence of stability and peaceful work environment is the eighth basic fault which is continuing though these facts have led to criticism.

All these also show miserable failures in personnel management!!

Another problem which retards progress in development and delivery of services of good quality to the people is inter-departmental rivalries and the tendency of some officers to withhold support for progressive action in order to show off their importance and status. Even technical departments are headed by IAS officers and allow professionals to be supervised by non-professionals. This has increased inter-service rivalries which hinder progress as well as accountability. 

Some officials tend to identify themselves with one political party or the other. As a result, interests of political parties are given more importance and national interests are sidetracked or abandoned. When a political party which is not of their choice forms government, these officers drag their feet to slow down developmental activities and thereby try to discredit the party which has formed the new government. To overcome this, deliberate transfer of officers are made with a vindictive mind. This results in the “favourite” officers misusing their powers and those not favoured dragging their feet.  Both create distractions and emotional problems which affect proper functioning of the management infrastructure. In the process, development and needs of the people get sidelined or even ignored.

Some archaic acts, rules and procedures and undemocratic attitudes of officials are not conducive for healthy development and attending to welfare of people, particularly for ensuring maximum benefit to the people. No serious attempts have been made to rectify the situation.

The above aspects depict the twelfth serious obstacle which resulted in a distorted and ineffective democracy.

To overcome this obstacle, a thorough study has to be undertaken to ascertain what stands in the way of the management infrastructure functioning as a well-knit unit with proper mindset, perceptions about democracy and different aspects of management as well as compliance with democratic principles and an attitude of helping people instead of denying services on some pretext or the other. This should be followed by action to remove these bottlenecks.

All officials should attend a specially conducted course which emphasizes the need for a proper mindset, perceptions about democracy and different aspects of management as well as compliance with democratic principles and an attitude of helping people instead of denying services on some pretext or the other, so that they can function effectively as a part of a well-knit organization with focus on democracy. New officials should attend this course soon after joining service.

Comments (especially those which point out errors or deficiencies, if any, in this article and thereby help to improve it) and suggestions to overcome these very serious obstacles are welcome. Please send these to StartRemovingBlocks@gmail.com. I shall make use of all befitting suggestions to prepare the last two articles of this series – Articled 23 will spell out the basic principles which will guide formulation of the revised system of democracy and Article 24 will outline the revised system of democracy for public debate to arrive at a consensus.

You can help to save our sinking democracy by making as many people as possible aware of these obstacles and possible solutions, through personal group discussions, newspaper articles, e-mail and social media like face book and twitter so that we can have healthy debates and arrive at some innovative ideas to save our sinking democracy.

Let us think and Act with an open mind to

Develop a Vibrant Democracy – Article 6

SRB

Introduction: I have identified thirty obstacles which cause a distorted and ineffective democracy and possible solutions for these. Because very few people have time / inclination to read long articles, these are presented in separate brief articles for pointed attention and easier assimilation. I hope this will lead to spreading of awareness and facilitating point by point debate on each of these for saving our sinking democracy.

 (Please keep these articles within easy reach for referring back till the series is completed.)

How government works

Attitude constraints: In a democracy, government has to function by giving utmost attention to feeling the pulse of the people. To do this, government has to keep an open mind and obtain information and feed back by making full use of different sources available in the country such as MPs, MLAs, Panchayat Raj institutions, resident welfare organizations in urban areas, media, social activists, intelligentsia, groups of people who speak up about                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     their problems etc. But, government does not have a systematic proactive approach to make use of all these multiple agencies to feel the pulse of the people. What is worse, it is not inclined to set up an organization to do this.

Sad to say, whenever government’s actions are questioned or suggestions for improvement are made, the usual reaction is to reject these on the faulty premise that listening to these will be considered as a sign of weakness. This intolerant attitude is anti-democratic and shows a know-all dictatorial approach. It proves beyond doubt that government gives only lip service to democracy and do not at all care for democracy, while ironically boasting that it functions as a democratic government. It has not realized that the real strength of a democratic government lies in its ability to (1) listen to people, (2) accept useful ideas and (3) act on these with vision and commitment. This attitude and expertise are sadly lacking.

A democracy has also to ensure that public funds are used efficiently and for the intended purposes. For this purpose, the Constitution has set up an authority called Comptroller and Auditor General of India (CAG). Sad to say, the government has not acted to remove the large number of anomalies about misuse and enormous losses of public funds pointed out by CAG. This attitude of not acting on important information provided by even a constitutional authority is another instance of a dictatorial approach and is a serious blow to democracy.

Faced with other problems of faulty governance, a strategy of escapism and / or buying time is chosen by referring the matter to Commissions, Standing Committees of Parliament etc. The findings of these top expert bodies are more often put in cold storage than acted upon. Even worse, sometimes, actions contrary to their recommendations are taken. For instance, in 2005, Standing Committee on Energy of Parliament had urged government to reduce its reliance on petro-taxes. This was not only ignored but also revenue from petro-taxes was repeatedly increased, showing scant respect for Parliament. The fact that government has scant respect for Parliament is further confirmed by repeatedly breaking promises given during replies to questions in Parliament or discussions on bills and motions. During the last 10 years this immoral action was repeated 1,024 times, as reported by the Ministry of Parliamentary Affairs (DNA dated 16-09-13)!! Over a longer time period many more instances of disrespect could have happened. This speaks volumes about (1) government’s gross lack of respect for Parliament and (2) the latter spinelessly tolerating disrespect thousands of times, without the dignity expected from the august supreme body of democracy.

Another attitude towards listening to people is also lamentable. Who says is more important than what is said. As a result, many useful and innovative ideas had no chance of being heard, because important people or known persons or sycophants had not said these.

Considering listening to people, expert groups set up by government and even constitutional authorities as a weakness instead of strength is the ninth and very serious obstacle which resulted in a distorted and ineffective democracy.

To overcome this obstacle, an organization has to be set up to (1) encourage people to freely express their views (particularly innovative ideas), (2) analyze these and (3) sort out and accept important / useful ones for implementation with commitment. If any suggestion of expert groups or constitutional authorities is rejected by government, Parliament / Assembly should take the initiative immediately to either disallow the rejection or ratify it if there are valid reasons for rejection.

Lopsided mindset: Government is obsessed with GDP growth rate and revenue collection. It becomes upset if GDP growth rate falls but is not bothered if people continue to suffer. Sad to say, the fact that high GDP has only resulted in widening the gap between the rich and the poor is not its concern. Even the obsession with money seems to be selective because government has not taken any tangible action against the multiple scams which have resulted in enormous losses of public money which, otherwise, could have been used for welfare of the people.

Another problem is questionable use of public funds with a lopsided mindset. For example, a scheme named Sonia Gandhi Go Shiksha Yojana has been running for over eight years and almost Rs. 8,000 crores of tax payers’ money “has been spent in the name of teaching traffic rules to cows”!! (DNA dated 6-10-12).

Almost every year audit reports caution about large scale wastages and surrendering of budgeted amounts because of lack of commitment.  But, these reports gather dust and hardly result in suitable action. All these and some more undisclosed wastages of tax payers’ money still continue without even a semblance of efforts at least to reduce these let alone stopping these. To cover up the increase in deficit due to these inefficiencies, additional taxation has been resorted to.

Serious thinking for devising clever methods of collecting more revenue is laudable if these funds are used for welfare of people. But, realities are discomforting. Late Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi had stated many years back that 85% of money spent on rural projects do not reach the beneficiaries. This colossal wastage is still continuing and depicts not only inefficiency but also a callous mind.

Because shortage of power is a serious problem, low priority and insufficient funds for alternate sources of power are maters for serious concern. Moreover, inefficient utilization of even the meagre funds allotted for various modes of power generation is another mater for even more serious concern. For example, capacity addition target for power generation was missed by 47% in 8^th Plan, 54% in 9^th Plan, 49% in 10^th Plan and 30% in 11^th Plan. Lack of commitment leading to the large number of instances of nonutilisation and misutilisation of public funds ought to be disconcerting but not so for government.

All these show that government is happy with its lopsided priorities and inefficiencies. A recent example of lopsided priority is the provision of Rs. 200 crores in the current budget for a statue of Sardar Patel and only Rs.100 crores for women’s safety, ignoring that the whole nation is crying hoarse for the latter. Besides being a lopsided priority, this is another example of ignoring peoples’ voice!!

The more efficient officers specially allotted to Finance Ministry have been super active to collect more revenues which are, sad to say, allowed to be wasted or misuilised by all ministries. To reduce fiscal deficit, emphasis has been on taxing more. The more healthy options of reducing fiscal deficit by preventing wastages and postponing projects with less priority hardly get attention.

The above aspects depict the tenth and very serious obstacle which resulted in a distorted and ineffective democracy.

This obstacle can be overcome only with a change in mindset to avoid lopsided priorities and inefficient implementation. Welfare of people (not GDP growth rate) should be the main guiding factor.

Illogical positioning: Successful governance requires qualified professionals to be completely in charge of various activities which can be properly handled by them only. But most of the technical departments are headed by IAS officers. This illogical positioning allows professionals to be supervised by non-professionals and thereby hinders progress as well as accountability.  In stead of facilitating performance of professional activities for welfare of people, this illogical positioning resulted in withholding required funds and other necessities and controlling professional persons and thereby hindering them in performing these activities. The emphasis is on administration of the professional department and not on facilitating effective performance of activities required for welfare of people.  One reason given is that professionals have no training in administration. This flimsy reasoning attaches more importance to administration of the department than to the activities to be performed for welfare of people!! Moreover, the obvious solution to improve efficiency of professional services to the people is to arrange for management training for professionals and to depute administrators to assist them only in administration of the department, in stead of smothering their work by illogical supervision and control of resources by administrators as is being done. 

This illogical positioning is the eleventh and very serious obstacle which resulted in a distorted and ineffective democracy.

To overcome this obstacle, highest priority should be given to various professional activities which are essential for welfare of people and not to administration of the departments. All departments carrying out professional services to the people should be headed by professionals who should be given training in management to organize effective professional services. In addition, they should be assisted by qualified administrators for tackling problems in administration within the department.

Comments (especially those which point out errors or deficiencies, if any, in this article and thereby help to improve it) and suggestions to overcome these very serious obstacles are welcome. Please send these to StartRemovingBlocks@gmail.com. I shall make use of all befitting suggestions to prepare the last two articles of this series – Articled 23 will spell out the basic principles which will guide formulation of the revised system of democracy and Article 24 will outline the revised system of democracy for public debate to arrive at a consensus.

You can help to save our sinking democracy by making as many people as possible aware of these obstacles and possible solutions, through personal group discussions, newspaper articles, e-mail and social media like face book and twitter so that we can have healthy debates and arrive at some innovative ideas to save our sinking democracy.

Let us think and Act with an open mind to

Develop a Vibrant Democracy – Article 5

SRB

Introduction: I have identified thirty obstacles which cause a distorted and ineffective democracy and possible solutions for these. Because very few people have time / inclination to read long articles, these are presented in separate brief articles for pointed attention and easier assimilation. I hope this will lead to spreading of awareness and facilitating point by point debate on each of these for saving our sinking democracy.

(Please keep these articles within easy reach for referring back till the series is completed.)

Government formation

Selection of Prime Minister (PM) / Chief Minister of a state (CM) is often influenced not by capacity for governance but by extent of hero worship of a leader on the one hand and fear psychosis created by vested interests on the other. A popular “hero” cannot be a “master” in every aspect of governance and can even be a “zero” in some aspects.  PM /CM should have the capacity to (1) manage even a heterogeneous team without curbing their enthusiasm like a dictator, and (2) resist pressures from vested interests. Popularity should only be an additional quality.

Moreover, the method of selection does not have even a semblance of democracy. A coterie of most influential leaders of the party (or parties) which form government makes the selection and a farcical election is conducted to give pretence of democracy. As a result, the PM/CM is not able to function effectively because of lack of firm majority support and domination by other power centre(s). PM /CM has to support ministers who are corrupt, inefficient or acting against national / state interest, instead of taking action against them. Non-government members of the coterie exercise powers without accountability. PM /CM has to suffer such distortions and also becomes answerable for the consequences.

PM / CM and the coterie of influential leaders then select ministers and allot portfolios to them. Experience and efficiency in carrying out required functions are supposed to play a part. But, in reality, there are number of extraneous considerations and power play which are not conducive to running an efficient government in a democratic manner.

All these actually result in a type of subtle and concealed dictatorship rather than a democracy.

These aspects depict the seventh and serious obstacle which resulted in a distorted and ineffective democracy.

To overcome this obstacle and enable the PM / CM to be able to function effectively with support of peoples’ representatives and without interference from other power centres, they should be directly elected by Parliament / Assembly, preferably through secret ballot. PM / CM can then select the team of ministers from the MPs / MLAs. The efficiency assessments suggested in Articles 3 and 4 will immensely help to objectively elect an efficient member as PM / CM and for them to select efficient ministers.

Another aspect is that a government can function only for a maximum period of five years even if its performance has immensely benefited the country. Why should the country gamble by spending enormous amounts of public money to replace such a desirable government with a new government every five years when there is no surety that a new government will be better than this efficient government? Moreover, lack of continuity leads to avoidable distractions and distortions in functioning of government. Will a corporate body or private enterprise change an efficient CEO merely to have a change at regular intervals? Why are we not applying such thoughts to have continuity of good governance? Is it because public “business” is nobody’s business and lacks in a sense of commitment?

This undesirable convention of unnecessarily changing even efficient governments is due to linking government formation with Parliament / Assembly formation. Why dismiss an efficient government just because a new Parliament / Assembly has to be constituted? All that is necessary is that the government should continue to be efficient and answerable to the new Parliament / Assembly.

On the other hand, a five year period can allow inefficiency and / or lack of transparency to continue for five years and ruin the country. In such a situation, why should we not immediately change that undesirable government without wasting lot of time to dissolve Parliament / Assembly, wait for completion of election processes, form a new Parliament / Assembly and then form a new government, unless these institutions are also at fault? Keeping in view the importance of having an efficient and accountable government, the Parliament / Assembly (not the coterie of influential leaders) ought to seriously consider selection of another set of members to form government.  Any obstacles to this should be removed in order to ensure dismissal of an inefficient or corrupt government without wasting time and incurring massive expenses for re-election of Parliament / Assembly.

In either situation mentioned above, interests of the concerned political parties may come in the way of peoples’ representatives taking suitable action with independence to (1) have an efficient and accountable government and (2) avoid spending enormous amounts of public money to form a new Parliament / Assembly when not required. It seems that the only tangible reason for regular change of Parliament / Assembly and government even when these are working efficiently is felt need or ambitions of politicians. If there are no other major reasons for the rigid 5-year change, is it appropriate to have a governance system tutored to the needs and ambitions of politicians?

Need for change of government should be based only on a regular system of assessment of efficiency of governance and follow up actions suggested in Article 3.  Providing the option to either continue or change government based on efficiency assessment will also increase the sense of accountability in the government system.

Should we not think seriously about removing the linkages mentioned above which come in the way of continuity of efficient and accountable governance or dismissal of an inefficient or corrupt government?

                                                                     

These aspects depict the eighth and serious obstacle which resulted in a distorted and ineffective democracy.

Overcoming this obstacle requires flexibility in choosing periodicity of elections (as suggested in Article 3) and de-linking Parliament / Assembly formation and political party system from government formation. These will help in two ways: (1) either continue an efficient government even after five years or dismiss an inefficient government whenever required and (2) save huge election expenses. What is urgently required is to start a regular system of assessment of efficiency of governance to decide on periodicity of government formation. This ought to be organized and conducted by a statutory body like the Election Commission as suggested in Article 4.

Comments (especially those which point out errors or deficiencies, if any, in this article and thereby help to improve it) and suggestions to overcome these obstacles are welcome. Please send these to StartRemovingBlocks@gmail.com. I shall make use of all befitting suggestions to prepare the last two articles of this series – Articled 23 will spell out the basic principles which will guide formulation of the revised system of democracy and Article 24 will outline the revised system of democracy for public debate to arrive at a consensus.

You can help to save our sinking democracy by making as many people as possible aware of these obstacles and possible solutions, through personal group discussions, newspaper articles, e-mail and social media like face book and twitter so that we can have healthy debates and arrive at some innovative ideas to save our sinking democracy.