The UPA has taken a 360 degree turn between the time that Anna Hazare undertook his first fast unto death and now. At that time Anna had brought the UPA down on its knees with senior ministers plying with the elderly Gandhian to break his fast and sit down for talks. Anna and his team agreed and talks began. But the intransigence of civil
society activists began to tell on the UPA’s apparent goodwill. For
Team Anna with the likes of Arvind Kejriwal, Prashant Bhushan etc, who were unwilling to make any compromises on the Lokpal Bill it was a foregone conclusion that there would be no convergence. Those in government feel that bringing certain institutions under the purview of the Lokpal might lead to a constitutional breakdown in case those who headed those institutions were found guilty of graft and were prosecuted. An example is that of the office of the prime minister and the chief justice of India. Evidently there is a lot that has to be thought through to come up with a near perfect Jan Lokpal Bill but as Aruna Roy, the RTI activist says, there needs to be more consultation with the ‘Jan’ (public) than there has been so far.
Aruna Roy is right. There are billions in this country who have the power of thought and ideas and who could have added value to the Jan Lokpal Bill if Hazare and his team took a little time to consult with them. The Jan Lokpal Bill has far reaching consequences and once in place would be a powerful instrument but it cannot be assured that all those who occupy the august seat of the Lokpal would always be above board. The office of Chief Vigilance Commissioner had just suffered a credibility blow. The same could happen to the Jan Lokpal as well. It is important to list out proper checks and balances. While the people of this country are all for fighting corruption in all its forms, the sane and sensible wonder if a fast unto death is the only weapon left for civil society to achieve its goals. Television debates also seem to veer around Anna’s mode of protest rather than the Bill itself. The debate in the country today is also about the status of parliament and elected representatives. If they are no longer to be trusted as Anna and his team suggest, and if they constitute the bulk of those who are out to loot the country then why were they elected in the first place?
This throws up many important issues which also need debating. The argument today is that if civil society sits on top of elected members of parliament then what happens to this fundamental institution of democracy? India is today in a crucible and it depends what the churning brings out ultimately.