By Patricia Mukhim
Doomsday predictions are not my favourite read. And there are plenty of such predictions which unfortunately come only from certain privileged individuals of certain religious backgrounds who have such visions. Why is it that no one so far has had a vision of how Meghalaya might look fifty years hence, even given the fact that me might not survive beyond 2012 which soothsayers have proclaimed will be the end of the world. Or is it the end of the world for humans only since we are its greatest predators, greediest consumers and callous inhabitants? What is it about greed that when it occupies the soul then our moral fibre goes out of the window? Then there are those who like Chanakya believe and act as if principles and morality are immiscible; that the two words are an oxymoron.
It was deeply enlightening to listen to the former Deputy Prime Minister of Malaysia, Anwar Ibrahim who addressed a gathering of people from 35 countries at the picturesque hill station of Panchgani, Maharashtra. The theme of the 4-day Dialogue was, “Making Democracy Work.” Ibrahim who was acquitted of sodomy charges on January 9 this year (the day he set out for Panchgani with his wife) was once a radical student leader but a much mellowed man today. He held important positions under the Mahathir government but was incarcerated because of some of his radical views. Ibrahim spent first two years and later six years in solitary confinement and confessed that he read the Best Works of Shakespeare four times over, several books on Gandhi, Tagore and Vivekananda and said he learnt so much about life from those readings. Later he taught at the Georgetown University, USA.
Speaking about democracy, Ibrahim said, “Democracy is a great institution but also likely to be the most abused.” The vastly articulate former deputy premier who is currently the leader of the opposition said that politics cannot be divorced from morality and moral yardsticks are imperative to measure performance. Only when politics moves with morality do rulers derive synergy to deliver governance. Everything else is a pursuit of power which benefits a few at the cost of the many and would eventually lead to collapse of economies and societies. But while holding those in power accountable, Ibrahim said it is important to also hold ourselves accountable. Speaking about India and its democracy, Ibrahim said despite all the untidiness and chaos that it is, the judiciary still remains a self correcting institution and above all people are free to speak up, which is not the case in his country. In Malaysia today he said there are grave human rights abuses, no gender rights exist, minorities are insulted, the judiciary is held captive by the ruling party to be used against political opponents, the media is fettered and people are not free to speak up.
After listening to several other speakers particularly those from Egypt who came with the eagerness to see and learn what they could take back from India to make their fledgling democracy work, one must salute one’s own country where democracy still works. Democracy in India still guarantees sufficient freedoms to its people provided we have the tools and the wisdom to claim those rights. Aruna Roy speaking about the Right to Information said that sloganeering is not such a bad thing. In Rajasthan, at the time when the RTI was being formulated, tried and tested, people used slogans like, “Hamara paisa, hamara hisab (my money, my accounts),” and, “Yeh panchayat hamara aap ka, nahin kisi ka baap ka” (This panchayat is your and mine, not your father’s property).
This set me thinking if we in Meghalaya do feel a similar sense of ownership of our institutions. In recent times we have read of village headmen and office bearers of the Dorbar Shnong in different villages, who officiate as chairpersons or secretaries of the Village Employment Councils (VECs) under the MNREGS, being arrested for misappropriation of funds, forging the signatures of job card holders and committing other malfeasance. Corruption which comes in various shapes and forms is the natural inclination of human beings. Until five years ago all government money for multifarious schemes used to be channelised through the office of the Block Development Officer (BDO) from where it was then deployed for various schemes in the Blocks and further down to the villages. With MNREGA the money came directly to the VECs and Area Employment Councils (AEC). So while at one time corruption was the prerogative of government officials and politicians, now it is more democratised as it is happening at the level of peoples’ grass roots institutions. Is this good or bad?
That corruption exists at all levels of governance is indisputable. But that it is being unearthed more and more by people who are stakeholders (not beneficiaries) in those schemes, through their own whistle blowing experiences, sometimes at the risk of being hounded out of their villages, is a great leap forward. When did villagers know so much about a scheme and about holding those entrusted with public money accountable? The MNREGA is a great education even if what is really happening on the ground is really not perceptible. Physical checks and balances in the MNREGA are weak, we must admit. But that money comes to poor households is perhaps more important. What really needs to be inspected is whether the really needy people are given job cards.
Social auditing, embedded in the MNREGA comprises of public hearings where accounts are supposed to be read out before the village committee and a detailed account of incomes and expenditures kept open for their inspection. This has actually empowered people to track irregularities, to ask questions and clarifications without fear. At one time you could not have imagined a poor person from the village questioning a government official about the use of public money. Now that people are empowered to ask questions at the level of the village they can also learn to question how BDOs spend the funds allocated for village development schemes and also how the MLA expends his/her MLA funds and how the government at the highest level spends its plan and non-plan funds. The NREGA is therefore a great learning experience on how democracy is supposed to work.
At the conference, several quotes were put up by people from different countries. One of them struck me as awesome. It said, “A citizen of democracy must open her/his mouth.” Another by an Indian entrepreneur said, “Tweeting our way to democracy.” But Aruna Roy’s exhortation, that “Conscience politics,” which Gandhi used to the hilt during the freedom movement can still play a very important role in reclaiming the lost spaces of democracy, tells us that civil society has a pre-eminent role to play. Conscience politics is distinct from power politics or the politics of elections. It is outside power politics yet it influences policy and allows citizens to engage with the government for their own best interests.
The conference drew from some of the best minds in the global media. Kanak Mani Dixit, editor, Himal South Asia and a powerful voice against the current Maoist regime of Nepal made an important revelation at the conference. He said Nepal is today so unstable that those who can afford a fare to Malaysia and other South East Asian countries go there to work; the poorest, he said, crossed over to India. This was what we had always suspected but which is now confirmed by an enlightened, outspoken editor. Should this send us or the government into a tizzy? Well, one only hopes the work permit system is implemented sooner than later.
Vijetha Yappa, editor of 30 years in Sri Lanka said people in a democracy must ask themselves whether they should vote candidates thrust upon them by political parties or whether they should look for the better person to represent them. Indeed democracy requires constant checks and balances that must evolve from the ground. If the Arab Spring could bring about such a great churning can we expect our own Meghalaya Spring, because, in the Spring of 2013 we will be electing our next set of representatives. Its time to think of the changes we envision and push our own charter of demands than be thrust with a cut and paste manifesto of political parties – manifestoes they themselves do not read and hardly believe in.