The New York Times, in its editorial published on October 8, 1999, praised the Indian Democracy in glowing terms. According to the NY times, for more than five decades, Indian democracy has succeeded against all the odds. The editorial went on to add that 360 million voters have proved that a commitment to resolving disputes peacefully and democratically can transform diversity into a source of strength.
However, the functioning of the Parliament has repeatedly been stalled by India’s main opposition party “Congress” on one flimsy ground or the other. The party has not been able to stomach the historic mandate Narendra Modi-led BJP got in the last general elections.
The current winter session of parliament is also heading for a complete washout as the opposition parties are stalling the party on the demonetization issue; ever since the prime minister demonetized the 1000 rupee note and replaced it with a new 2000 rupee note. Similarly, the old 500-rupee note has been replaced with a new 500 rupees note. Frequent stalling of the parliament has already cost the exchequer over $15 million.
The move to demonetize was made to combat corruption, terror financing, and counterfeit currency coming from across the border. Although the intent behind demonization was laudable, its poor implementation has put the ordinary citizens to great inconvenience. Most of the automated telling machines (ATM) have gone dry, as the new 1000 and 500 are smaller in size requiring for re-calibration of machines. It is estimated that it will take minimum two months to normalise the situation. However, in spite of great inconvenience, most of the ordinary people are backing the prime minister’s decision in the fervent hope that demonetization will unearth billions of rupees stashed away by corrupt officials and businessmen. The opposition parties have gone out all guns blazing against the Indian prime minister. But, it is unlikely they will be successful in changing the minds of ordinary people who are backing the prime minister as he commands a lot of respect among the ordinary citizens of India, for they see him as a Messiah who would improve the economic conditions of the of the ordinary citizens.
According to an estimate by the World Bank, India’s black money is almost equivalent to one-fifth of India’s Gross Domestic Product. There is a body of opinion that even if the demonetization of the government is successful, it will unearth 6 percent of the black money. The government should have simultaneously targeted the real estate and bullion, where, it is estimated that 94 percent of the black money has been invested. Another cause of worry is that this move will bring the GDP down by one and two per cent.
Earlier, the monsoon session of the parliament had come to a virtual standstill with the opposition parties, led by the Congress, demanding the resignations of the Union Foreign Minister and two CMs belonging to the ruling party, as a precondition for the smooth functioning of the parliament. The charge against the Foreign Minister was that she had used undue influence on the British government for issuing travel documents to Lalit Modi, an economic offender, to enable him to visit Portugal where his wife was receiving treatment for cancer.
In the case of the two Chief Ministers, there were serious allegations of impropriety and corruption. The Madhya Pradesh Chief Minister’s family was accused of irregularity in admission and recruitment scam (Vyapam). Over 30 witnesses, who would have blown the lid off the scam, died in mysterious circumstances. For every day of non-functioning of the parliament, the loss to the exchequer is estimated to be over $3 million. According to an estimate, the total loss of not transacting business in the Indian Parliament over the last five years was over $35 million, which a developing country like India could ill afford. The Rajasthan Chief Minister Raje was accused of issuing a secret witness statement supporting the immigration plea in Britain of Lalit Modi, the former commissioner of the Indian Premier League.
There is a now serious debate whether a parliamentary system of government is best suited for developing countries like India. However, a study of other forms of governance shows that this system is far better than other autocratic forms of governance, where individual freedom is severely curtailed.
Freedom is essential for living in any society. Dissent is inevitable and necessary in multicultural societies, as in India. A multi-party system is the only form of governance feasible when every section of the populace is well represented in the parliament to voice its opinions. However, if the parties do not act responsibly, like in the present case, it is the country that will ultimately suffer. It is earnestly hoped the opposition parties will act responsibly by engaging in a healthy discussion and debate in the parliament instead of filibustering. If the opposition is able to engage in healthy discussions, the government will be forced to reconsider some of its controversial and unpopular decisions. The present state of flux has severely impaired India’s image abroad. It is incumbent upon the government to reach out to the opposition and restore order in both houses of parliament.
Kim Dae-Jung, former president of South Korea and a Nobel Prize recipient, speaking about the virtues of democracy, once said, “I believe that democracy is the absolute value that makes for human dignity, as well as the only road to sustained economic development and social justice.” The need of the hour is not a one-party system or any other form of aggressive governance, but a competent government within the framework of democracy.
It is hoped the leaders of all the parties soon realise that frequent stonewalling the proceeding in the parliament will seriously hurt India’s image, apart from impairing India’s growth story, especially when the World Bank, IMF have forecasted that India will emerge as a superpower by 2030.
The author is an Independent Columnist and Political Commentator