Thursday, September 01, 2011

It was Anna, not Janlokpal Bill

Arvind Kejriwal, one of the activists behind the Janlokpal Bill, in his interview to The Hindu said, “People wanted the JLB”. 

That is a patently wrong assumption to derive from the popular anti-corruption movement that we witnessed in India over the last few weeks.   Most people who showed up at the Anna Hazare Movement gatherings in various cities of India have not read Janlokpal Bill created by these activists.  They do not know that these activists are bent on pushing their version of the bill onto Indians riding the popular mood than sitting down to discuss and debate the issue with others.  Many Indians came to show their support to Anna Hazare who, according to them, is fighting the corruption in India.   These people wanted to express their solidarity with any anti-corruption campaign, not necessarily the Janlokpal Bill.   Kejriwal himself admits in the interview:

When we conducted referendums on the JLB, we used to try and explain its contents to people. But they said they did not want to understand the details. They just wanted to put a mohar [stamp] on Anna.

Kejriwal and his gang of activists are using Anna Hazare to promote their version of the bill which is not very different from the bill proposed by the Government, except that these activists want sweeping powers to one single body without any accountability.  If people were to read various versions of the bill, they would get confused because they all look very similar, except that the devil is in the details.  Looking at the bill proposed by the government, it seems as though Government of India is as keen as these activists to root out the corruption; so why all this hullabaloo and tamasha, one may ask?


When the fast got on the way in April 2011, Anna Hazare camp made the people of India believe that their key demands were inclusion of PM and higher judiciary in the purview of Lokpal, and moving CBI and CVC under Lokpal.  But now Anna Hazare’s camp claims victory when the Parliament decided to ‘consider’ three completely different set of provisions.  So, what were the Indian people fighting for in the first place?

Inclusion of lower bureaucracy into the ambit:  So, how can a fight which started off wanting the PM, the Cabinet, the Supreme Court judges to be covered by Lokpal, thereby focusing on the highest echelons of the government and judiciary, suddenly become victorious when it included the lowest echelon?  Many of the lower officers in states are already covered by the existing Lokayuktas. 

Forcing all states to have Lokayuktas and putting them under Lokpal: Nearly 18 major states in India already have Lokayuktas while other states are making provisions to have one of their own.  Manmohan Singh gave an excuse that imposing Lokayuktas by the Center onto the States would go against our federalism.  There is already a controversy in Gujarat on this as we speak.  So, what has Anna Hazare Movement achieved?  Do they want to put all those Lokayuktas under one central organization so that they can be controlled and manipulated by New Delhi thereby making state level units become ineffective?   

Citizen grievances charter under Lokpal:  The Government of India had earlier indicated it’s desired to set this up but outside the ambit of Lokpal to avoid unnecessary bloating of the organization.  With Anna’s demand, they are ready to consider including that charter under Lokpal without losing much. 

Janlokpal Bill as promoted by these activists or for that matter Lokpal Bill as promoted by the Government of India has serious issues which have far and wide repercussions on the democratic institutions that we have carefully built so far.  We have been quite enthusiastic in the past to pass certain laws which later became draconian, only to be used by the political leaders to punish and harass their opponents, by the rich to harass the poor, by the majority religion to persecute the minorities.  TADA, POTA, AFSPA, were all passed with good intentions, to curb terrorism, but they ended up creating autocratic systems within the country targeting certain weak people, certain poor people, and certain minorities.

When Kejriwal was asked: Why did you ask for Parliamentary due process to be suspended? You didn't want the JLB to go to the Standing Committee.  He answered:

The JLB was drafted after wide consultations; it underwent many revisions based on feedback. Where is this kind of discussion in the drafting of any sarkari Bill?

Janlokpal Bill did not include wide consultations.  Actually some of the controversial bills from the Government in the recent times were far more inclusive eliciting opinions from various sections of the society.  When they don’t want the debate, it shows the arrogance of these self-appointed activists trying to impose one version of the bill onto entire people of India using innocent mask of Anna Hazare.  The opposition to the Janlokpal Bill comes various sections – like Aruna Roy and the editors of print media who have already vocalized their thoughts against the bill. 

It should have been the responsibility of TV media to bring some sanity to the debate.  Instead, they just joined the jingoism and started demanding that Parliament should pass the bill without due debate on the topic.  The media did not do their homework on the topic.  None of them read the bill.  They blindly support Janlokpal Bill just because they support Anna Hazare Movement and they are not necessarily the same. 

There is an immediate need to decouple Anna Hazare Movement and Janlokpal Bill to treat them as two different issues with different agendas.  While one of them is a movement expressing the outrage of people against pervasive malaise called corruption, the other is an elitist agenda with very narrow outlook that appropriates unlimited power with little accountability.

Just because we Indians supported Mahatma Gandhi in our fight for freedom from British does not mean it should be seen as a support for his version of constitution (if it existed).  Our support for Gandhi cannot be equated with our support for his version of how this country should be governed.  If Gandhi had his own constitution, then we would have no industry, no standing army to protect ourselves from Pakistan or China, and our national pastime would have been giving each other enema. 

Indian Constitution was not pushed onto the people as an agenda by Mahatma Gandhi.  Instead, it was drafted by lawyers and politicians, debating and discussing various issues which are recorded and available for people to read; and in fact those debates makes an interesting read and shows the maturity of the architects. 

No such debate took place in framing Janlokpal Bill.  No such maturity is seen in the architect’s discussion and debate.  In fact, the debate is being suppressed by the activists of Janlokpal Bill now riding the popular sentiment.  They want no discussion on the bill and demand that it should be passed by the Parliament as it is.  All such demands backed by popular movements designed to impose an autocratic law with narrow interests onto the people of India should be rejected and discredited before they become a menace.

18 comments:

  1. "If Gandhi had his own constitution, then we would have no industry, no standing army to protect ourselves from Pakistan or China, and our national pastime would have been giving each other enema. "

    The last part cracked me up :)

    Seriously, I wonder how many of the young college dudes would have supported Anna Hazare had they known that they cannot pay off a cop Rs. 100 and get away when they get pulled over for running a red light, if Jan Lokpal bill gets passed.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Maybe your title should read 'It was Anna fasting, not Janlokpal Bill'. IMO, a majority of people came to see a simple old man fasting against mighty state. I tried to imagine the protest, where Anna and co would do the exact same protest with only exception that Anna will not fast. He will sit on the dias and motivate the crowd. In my imagination, the movement would not have been as effective. Therefore, I believe 'fasting anna' was more important than 'anna' and certainly much more important than JaLeBi.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I have already expressed my gratitude for your blog in one of the posts.I find them very informative and sometimes they help me build my opinions.This takes care of the reason why I am still following your blog...but I find your conclusive power to be irresponsible and I fear,it sends wrong signals in the society.So mostly I disapprove of what you say.While abiding with your favorite quote,I try to avoid unnecessary neutrality and protest the same,whether you like it or not.But by any chance if you find my comments to be intruding your personal liberty,let me know,I will quit the blog.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Coming to your post=>
    1."People backed Anna rather than JLB".True.But why didn't you try to find the reason WHY SO?It is the govt that has detached itself from the masses,not vice versa.Guardians of democracy have lost their credibility.Thats why it proved out to be productive for team Anna.Now supposedly govt tries to rectify the mistake and tries to restore the lost ground it will be a win-win situation for us,won't it?In-fact I figure with young turks taking the charge from the front the process has already started(http://rtn.asia/965_young-mp-jayant-chaudhary-holds-mirror-fellow-mps-lok-sabha-lokpal)

    2."...(JLB) is not very different from the bill proposed by the Government.."If it is so,I wonder why PM accepted faultiness of his own bill and gave room for some replica.

    3."Janlokpal Bill did not include wide consultations"-What is your definition of WIDE?Post-independence no bill had been as discussed as Lokpal bill(thanks to JLB of-course)

    4."They want no discussion on the bill and demand that it should be passed by the Parliament as it is."

    Wait a minute and have a look on govt's policy-
    > "You won't speak.We won't listen(eg.impotency to deal with terrorism).
    > "You will speak.We will not be able to hear so lower voices"(eg.AFSPA enactment and ignorance to remove it).
    > "You will speak loudly.It will not be beneficial for supremacy of our ears"(eg.JLB movement)
    > "You will slap under our ears.We will declare you rebels that don't deserve to be listened.We will condemn your right to protest." to.(eg.Naxalism.maoism,separitist movement)

    Now tell me which among these is a better way of making govt listen to our causes.I wonder if Aruna Roy's draft would have been ever discussed had it not been team Anna.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Rohan:

    It is the govt that has detached itself from the masses,not vice versa.Guardians of democracy have lost their credibility.Thats why it proved out to be productive for team Anna.Now supposedly govt tries to rectify the mistake and tries to restore the lost ground it will be a win-win situation for us,won't it?

    2."...(JLB) is not very different from the bill proposed by the Government.."If it is so,I wonder why PM accepted faultiness of his own bill and gave room for some replica.

    Just because Government has lost its credibility does not mean we should accept a bill that has potential to become a draconian system. I am strongly opposed to giving sweeping powers to any organization or body whether the proposal stems from social activists or from the Government.

    3."Janlokpal Bill did not include wide consultations"-What is your definition of WIDE?Post-independence no bill had been as discussed as Lokpal bill(thanks to JLB of-course)

    Post-Independence, many bills have been discussed and debated that brought forth the wrath of the public or the opposition parties. To start with Hindu Code Bill was not accepted by the Parliament in its original form and had to be broken into parts and they were passed only when the time was ripe. The States Reorganization Act of 1956 may have been the most debated topic till date where many voices were spoken and heard, incorporating many changes in the final version of the bill that was passed in the Parliament. The list goes on.

    Activists of JLB are making a fool of the young Indians who have no idea what history is. They are telling the youth that no bill was debated before and the young Indians are lapping it up without reading their history. It’s unfortunate.

    ReplyDelete
  6. *Just because Government has lost its credibility does not mean we should accept a bill that has potential to become a draconian system. I am strongly opposed to giving sweeping powers to any organization or body whether the proposal stems from social activists or from the Government.*

    I don't expect you or anyone to accept something you don't believe in.While I may disapprove with your opinions,I will always defend your right to speak what you believe in.In-fact I have already agreed on one point with you-neither JLB or govt's LB is self-efficient.I believe Aruna Roy's bill with decentralized powers is the best way forward.All I want to say is while banishing the odds we should not neglect the positives,for I believe encouraging the positivity is the best way of rectifying negativity.

    *Activists of JLB are making a fool of the young Indians who have no idea what history is. They are telling the youth that no bill was debated before and the young Indians are lapping it up without reading their history. It’s unfortunate.*

    If that is so,I pardon my lack of knowledge.Thing is in our lifespans we have first time witnessed such a fine demo of participatory democracy in India.So such sentiments are natural from us young Indians,isn't it? ;-)

    Bhagat Singh said "Merciless criticism and independent thinking are the two necessary traits of revolutionary thinking." We have got first trait installed this time,maybe with the help of wisdom of seniors like you hopefully we will soon install second one ;-) Wish us good luck!!!!

    ReplyDelete
  7. "Indian Constitution was not pushed onto the people as an agenda by Mahatma Gandhi. Instead, it was drafted by lawyers and politicians, debating and discussing various issues which are recorded and available for people to read;"

    This is the sore missing point, in our current generation and middle class impatience. I see the current circus similar to nonsensical terms such as "noble dictator" which has been the dream of most Indians I have talked with.

    " The media did not do their homework on the topic." This is appalling. Weren't there no serious point-by-point discussion in the media, of the two versions of the bill? Sigh!

    -v

    ReplyDelete
  8. "When we conducted referendums on the JLB, we used to try and explain its contents to people. But they said they did not want to understand the details. They just wanted to put a mohar [stamp] on Anna." - This wrong. They just wanted corruption to end. Weather or not they have clarity on what JLP means, weather or not they themselves are corrupted, the fact is that they want a corruption free India. This is a very good first step to end corruption in India. I insist, this is only a first step. I totally welcome it. I don't know how people one side think JLP won't help a bit but on the other side assures wonders with Telangana state formation !!!!

    ReplyDelete
  9. Sripal Sama:

    I don't know how people one side think JLP won't help a bit but on the other side assures wonders with Telangana state formation !!!!

    If you think harder you may realize that formation of a statehood is equivalent to getting Independence from British which is a first step to having a self-rule.

    The second step would be what type of government? Will it be communism, a republic - directly electing the executive or indirectly electing one, a democracy- parliamentary or a presidential, secular - will it be agnostic to religions or will it give equal importance to all religions, etc.

    An intention to curb corruption and bringing awareness to the masses so that they do not accept it in various forms is equivalent to India getting Independence.

    Discussion and debate on how we are going to achieve that goal is like debating on what kind of government we will have, what kind of laws we will pass once we become independent.

    One could agree on India becoming Independent but disagree on embracing communism as a form of government.

    The same way, fighting for formation of separate Telangana is akin to Indian Independence Movement while what we do with Telangana comes after that.

    The same way, fighting against corruption does not necessarily mean endorsment of Janlokpal Bill.

    BTW...

    Nobody assures wonders when Telangana is formed. At least not many of us who fight for Telangana.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Nobody assures wonders when Telangana is formed. At least not many of us who fight for Telangana.

    Are you sure? You never heard KCR's KG to PG?
    No it was not an election promise. He says it "telangana vachhinaanka".
    He also says 10000 government jobs will be created in each district.

    OK OK per you they are achievable and Telanganas have that commitment. That raises another wonder why Telanganas do not emulate Indians under britishers in all aspects? Indians ran private businesses, schools, services, libraries with and without government aid. Why not Telanganas setup private industries in T districts and provide employment?

    ReplyDelete
  11. Why not Telanganas setup private industries in T districts and provide employment?

    Irrelevant to the discussion.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Why not Telanganas setup private industries in T districts and provide employment?

    Irrelevant to the discussion.


    Irrelevant because the more intelligent invite someone to do the hardwork and later under socialist redistributive principles nationalise them happily.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Irrelevant to the discussion.

    Could have said same in response to Sripal. You did not lose an opportunity to compare T-movement with India's freedom movement. But you are not ready to compare how rest of society behaved during the movements.

    Fine this is irrelevant. What KCRs claims? How can you say 'Nobody...'?

    ReplyDelete
  14. Sujai -

    "Nobody assures wonders when Telangana is formed. At least not many of us who fight for Telangana."

    'Assuring wonders' might be a little harsh usage but tell me if we are not sure about wonders, do we need so much suffering ? Do we have to have our children ask a question, 'Do I have school tomorrow ?' everyday ? Do we have to have two police jeeps securing every single APSRTC bus that doe's its duty ? Do we have to pay double or triple the required charges for auto wallahs for their service ? Do we have to have administration dead ? Do we have to have so many hours of power cuts everyday ? While we pay taxes, why should we have to have the govt. employees bunk their duties ?

    If formation of Telangana state doesn't assure wonders, or assure anything +ve, do we have to suffer so much ?

    With due respect, I agree with your statement, 'fighting against corruption does not necessarily mean endorsment of Janlokpal Bill'.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Hi Sujai,

    What happened to your article on Hyderabad I saw yesterday. The trend is getting more clear.

    Option 4 (in geography terms) with SAR status like Pondicherry and Telangana with Warangal as capital.

    Of course there will be a HUGE package for both the new states to form their capitals from the centre.

    I think reasonably considered it is a WIN-WIN for all.

    Hyderabadis are happy (including MIM which will love a Pondicherry styled SAR). Telanganas are happy. And SeemaAndhras are happy.

    What better solution can be other than that.

    I am waiting for your article which I read yesterday. Is there a problem with the Blogger's service that it is still not up?

    ReplyDelete
  16. If You oppose team Anna's lokpal or ombudsman law then it is OK in democracy but are you all seriously supporting government's lokpal?? It is a worse peace of legislation. Aruna Roy, Anudhatri Roy and other critics of Anna's lokpal are extreme critics of government's lokpal.
    Aruna Roy even supports PM inclusion and higher judiciary inclusion saying"excluding the prime minister and the higher judiciary from lokpal was wrong".

    ReplyDelete
  17. If You oppose team Anna's lokpal or ombudsman law then it is OK in democracy but are you all seriously supporting government's lokpal?? It is a worse peace of legislation. Aruna Roy, Anudhatri Roy and other critics of Anna's lokpal are extreme critics of government's lokpal.
    Aruna Roy even supports PM inclusion and higher judiciary inclusion saying"excluding the prime minister and the higher judiciary from lokpal was wrong".

    ReplyDelete
  18. Are you being paid by congress or you are any politician ?? I dont know who else will write such a thing?

    ReplyDelete

Dear Commenters:
Please identify yourself. At least use a pseudonym. Otherwise there will be too many *Anonymous*; making it confusing.

Do NOT write personal information or whereabouts about the author or other commenters. You are free to write about yourself. Please do not use abusive language. Do not indulge in personal attacks and insults.

Write comments which are relevant and make sense so that the debate remains healthy.