Indian Parliamentary System
60 years of Indian parliamentary system. What do I make of it?
A simple thing: more and more people in India reading Mein Kampf by Adolf Hitler. More and more people liking the civil society activists. More and more people all over the world angered by the Indian economic policies and procedures. More and more people in India are talking about the Arab Spring. More and more people...
The list goes on and on...and people are not happy with the way things are neither at the Center nor at the state (federal) levels.
What do people think of politicians? Dirty, corrupt pigs. What do people think of government officials ('babus')? Lazy, corrupt pigs. Is this correct? It doesn't matter. What people think about you is who you are to the rest of the world! And there has to be a grain of truth if most people think of you the way they do.
How has this come to pass? We are a country who have had expert statesmen like Sardar Patel, Rajagopalachari and Vajpayee...all politicians. Going by the oratory skills of our politicians, there would be no better group of people on all earth. Strong, articulate people. But we still don't like the people whom we elect (hopefully) by secret ballot every 5 years or so. Is the system correct in letting us selecting the right candidate to REPRESENT us? Is the Indian democracy really a "of the people, for the people, by the people"? Why can't we reject all the candidates if they don't really represent you or me? How can we put up candidates from in-between us who has done something constructive rather than getting people to represent us from parties whom we don't know anything of their internal workings? Why can't we just disband all parties and just have individuals representing us in Parliament? No ruling party, no opposition. Just true individual people representing the people who elected him/ her to to safeguard their interests and more importantly make the RIGHT decision.
What constitutes a person who can represent his/ her constituency? I am sure the Election Commission has already enshrined these points but paramount among them according to me are the following:
1. Has to be literate - has to have completed basic education.
2. Has to have contributed substantially to society and should have something in common with the people whom s/he represents.
3. Has to give a certification about their knowledge of the Indian constitution in the language of their choice.
Those members who want to lead a ministry should specifically get a certification to be qualified for that ministry.
At different points in time since India's independence, people have thought of bringing in the American way of parliament - an oligarchical system with few parties. Is this important? Is this the right way?
People have also asked why we need the role of the President in Indian democracy and indeed the cost on the exchequer. Is this role really required?
Do we need the Rajya Sabha?
So many questions. No straight answers.
I'll update this post or write in a continuation post.
Till then, please write in your thoughts. Do post in your comments.
A simple thing: more and more people in India reading Mein Kampf by Adolf Hitler. More and more people liking the civil society activists. More and more people all over the world angered by the Indian economic policies and procedures. More and more people in India are talking about the Arab Spring. More and more people...
The list goes on and on...and people are not happy with the way things are neither at the Center nor at the state (federal) levels.
What do people think of politicians? Dirty, corrupt pigs. What do people think of government officials ('babus')? Lazy, corrupt pigs. Is this correct? It doesn't matter. What people think about you is who you are to the rest of the world! And there has to be a grain of truth if most people think of you the way they do.
How has this come to pass? We are a country who have had expert statesmen like Sardar Patel, Rajagopalachari and Vajpayee...all politicians. Going by the oratory skills of our politicians, there would be no better group of people on all earth. Strong, articulate people. But we still don't like the people whom we elect (hopefully) by secret ballot every 5 years or so. Is the system correct in letting us selecting the right candidate to REPRESENT us? Is the Indian democracy really a "of the people, for the people, by the people"? Why can't we reject all the candidates if they don't really represent you or me? How can we put up candidates from in-between us who has done something constructive rather than getting people to represent us from parties whom we don't know anything of their internal workings? Why can't we just disband all parties and just have individuals representing us in Parliament? No ruling party, no opposition. Just true individual people representing the people who elected him/ her to to safeguard their interests and more importantly make the RIGHT decision.
What constitutes a person who can represent his/ her constituency? I am sure the Election Commission has already enshrined these points but paramount among them according to me are the following:
1. Has to be literate - has to have completed basic education.
2. Has to have contributed substantially to society and should have something in common with the people whom s/he represents.
3. Has to give a certification about their knowledge of the Indian constitution in the language of their choice.
Those members who want to lead a ministry should specifically get a certification to be qualified for that ministry.
At different points in time since India's independence, people have thought of bringing in the American way of parliament - an oligarchical system with few parties. Is this important? Is this the right way?
People have also asked why we need the role of the President in Indian democracy and indeed the cost on the exchequer. Is this role really required?
Do we need the Rajya Sabha?
So many questions. No straight answers.
I'll update this post or write in a continuation post.
Till then, please write in your thoughts. Do post in your comments.
Comments
Post a Comment