Anna Hazare’s sitting on indefinite fast in Delhi has galvanized the middle class of this country, which is most vocal against corruption but also the one responsible for most corruption in this country.
Sandeep Pandey for BeyondHeadlines
Anna Hazare’s sitting on indefinite fast in Delhi has galvanized the middle class of this country, which is most vocal against corruption but also the one responsible for most corruption in this country. Corruption is a very contentious issue. Our morals tell us to oppose it but for convenience we often make a compromise, always giving ourselves the benefit of doubt. Former Prime Minister Chandrashekhar used to say that corruption can never become a political issue in this country. Yet, this country saw how Vishwanath Pratap Singh rode on a wave of anti-corruption campaign in the context of allegations of kickbacks in Bofors deal to displace the Congress Party from power at the centre.
But Anna Hazare’s campaign has raised very interesting issues. His main demand is that a committee consisting half the members from civil society drafts the Lokpal Bill. Even though the government has been discussing the Lokpal Bill for the past 42 years the people are not happy with various versions of the bill. The civil society has been demanding a much more stringent bill. The government’s bill hardly empowers the Lokpal to take any action against the corrupt. Civil society wants a law which can punish the guilty within two years, recover the money made in corruption and includes Judiciary in its ambit. Obviously anybody part of the system would be jittery with such proposals. The government lacks the will to accept the ideas of civil society because all political parties thrive on corruption. In fact, corruption sustains their politics. To accept the civil society proposal would mean radical changes in the way politics is carried out in this country. The civil society wants just that. Cleanse the system of corrupt.
A theoretical question raised by some is how the civil society could put pressure of the government to make a certain law, not to talk of proposing a draft for the bill. It is being argued that it is prerogative of legislature to make laws. But when the people have lost faith in the legislature then what recourse is open to them? They could have reposed faith in Judiciary but then Judiciary too is fast losing its sheen. The senior advocates Bhushan father son duo claim that more than half the past 15 Supreme Court chief justices have been corrupt. When the people see the Legislature, Executive and Judiciary taking them for a ride and media too being coopted by the corrupt system, they have little choice but to demand participation in decision making.
National Advisory Council is body consisting of some civil society members which was formed during the tenure of last government. It has played very important role in drafting wonderful legislations like the RTI and NREG. So, the question is why cannot members of civil society, outside of NAC, or in other words not people of government’s choice, draft a Lokpal Bill? Actually, NAC has already undertaken an exercise to formulate a draft of Lokpal Bill which is palatable to the civil society outside NAC. The version is closer to the one being proposed by Anna Hazare’s campaign than the government’s version.
The government is reluctant to allow civil society members, not of its choice, become part of the drafting committee of a Bill lest it might set a precedent and civil society might start demanding its share in drafting of every legislation. But the government must realize that the situation to come to such a pass because of the nature of people who dominate politics these days. A relevant example is Sharad Pawar being made a member of Group of Ministers to consider drafting Lokpal Bill. Anna Hazare ridiculed him saying how a corrupt minister can be part of the drafting team of an anti-corruption legislation. The pressure created due to Anna Hazare’s statement in the backdrop of a nationwide movement forced Sharad Pawar to resign from the GoM body.
The days of representative democracy are over. With RTI people had access to information, which was until then a prerogative of only the ruling elites. Now people want a role in decision making. There is no way government can resist the pressure for very long. Hopefully, this is the beginning of change of political character of this country. With things becoming transparent and open questioning of the corrupt, there will be no incentive for the corrupt to enter politics. The genuine politicians will fill the seats in Assemblies and Parliament. Right now it is the super rich, criminal and corrupt who are in majority. If instead of Party identity the MPs in parliament were to be divided between corrupt and non-corrupt, it is the corrupt who will form a government.
Anna Hazare’s campaign has received tremendous support from common people, like the JP and VP movements previously did. But unlike the previous two occasions there is no political person at the helm who can guide it in the right political direction. It may be argued that inspite of very sanguine leadership both times in the past, the movements soon degenerated into something worse than they had set out to replace when actual governments were formed. This time is is more a non-political movment which aims at systemic reform. It does not aim to change the government. It wants to change the system. If Anna Hazare succeeds in this he will make a far deeper impact on the system than JP or VP did.
The response Anna Hazare has received from youth is worth seeing. It is the same youth which was cheering the Indian cricket team till the other day at World Cup. But now it is involved in anti-corruption campaign with equal passion. It is the not the concern to make the system more user friendly. Most of this youth is either in comfortable jobs or will land with one soon. She is fired by the idealism to make the nation better. That is why a class of people who probably have never come out on streets for anything can be seen managing affairs at the protest sites and participating in them enthusiastically. They also have a recent experience to go by. They have seen what happened when people came out in Tahrir Square in Egypt. Of course, the computer sites, a favourite with the youth, have played a key role in mobilization, part of which is pouring in at the sit-ins.
Sandeep Pnadey is a Magsaysay Award winner social activist