Editor,
Apropos the letter by Michael N. Syiem, no doubt the electoral system in India is very complex in nature and it’s not free from drawbacks. The first past the post system (FPTP) is one of them. It allows a person to be declared elected even with a small pie in the total vote share by virtue of being the front runner among all competing candidates in terms of votes garnered. This system has been practiced since the birth of our Constitution and continues till date. In the early days it might be justified somehow, considering the limited number of political parties competing, resulting in minor division of votes, but with the passage of time and with the entry of large number of political parties at the national, state and regional level as well as independent candidates, fragmentation of votes has become a new reality and the winning candidates might garner less than a quarter of the votes polled. When we examine this fact we might realize that democracy has taken a back seat and the election has taken the front seat, since winning election has become the sole target overriding the moral hazards of not representing the popular opinion of the masses. In fact the right path should be vice versa. Democratic principles should precede electoral principles, since fair and free election was designed to realize democratic values.
Free and fair election is the backbone of any democratic system. It strengthens democracy by giving enough scope and opportunity to assimilate both minority and majority’s will to represent themselves. But it is also the least reformed system post-independence. Although the Election Commission has tried its best to bring certain positives changes, like the moral code of conduct (MCC), electoral funding regulations, preventing criminalization of politics etc., which signify it noble intention but the reality is something else. Today, money power rules the roast and criminals enjoy political power. Ironically any new changes in the electoral system requires the consolidated will of the political class itself!
The FPTP has become a dampening factor in the current system, where a minority stands to rule the majority’s will. No doubt in India, where heterogeneity is the prime character, minorities will also need to be adequately represented and constitutionally several safeguards has been designed and guaranteed by reserving seats for such class. But is impossible to reserve seats for every sect and clan due to the diverse nature of our society. A middle path might be taken by making it mandatory to secure at least 50% vote share to claim victory as a symbolic representation of the popular will.
Electoral reforms are a highly contentious issue and as mentioned earlier any change requires the consensus of the political class itself in the parliament, thereby making it difficult. Some changes which have come by are via the convention route and not by law itself. Any scope for electoral reforms is futile since political power is what every candidate clings to at any cost. Their sacrificing the shortcut opportunity by modifying FPTP is highly improbable.
Electoral reforms are therefore a one-sided affair with the elected and the electorate at two ends of the pole. In a representative form of democracy the electorate possess the ultimate power, thus electorate reforms also has its importance. An informed and enlightened electorate nourished with adequate information will serve better in establishing a clean politics. We need qualitative and quantitative electoral enrolment. Merely increasing numbers of fresh voters won’t be sufficient if we are deficient in our political attitude, narrowed down by nepotism and political chauvinism and more importantly the one driven by extreme form of sub nationalism, resulting only in further dividing Indian society. Democratic values (e.g., secularism, tolerance, brotherhood etc.) is our guiding star for shaping our political views and judgment. Whether the elected class are ready to reform themselves or live with existing electoral system would become less futile if and only if the electorate are ready to reform themselves and transform our society into a mature democracy. The saying,” Democracy is the government of the people, by the people, for the people” means that people are the foundation of democracy itself. This is further complemented by Nelson Mandela who said, “An educated, enlightened and informed population is one of the surest ways of promoting the health of a democracy.”
Yours etc.,
Sonie Kharduit
Via email
Congress’s arbitrary actions
Editor,
The Congress came to the Khasi-Jaintia Hills and Garo Hills much before Meghalaya attained statehood, yet till date and after 45 years of statehood, the Party still cannot get a majority on its own during the last elections. It needed the coalition of independents and other smaller partners to form the governments in the state. This reflects poorly on the performance of this Party and its past and present leadership. Of course, we cannot deny that this party, because of its antecedents has been able to enlist members in all villages, formed units in all polling booths and has its Blocks Committees in all 60 constituencies, District Committees in all 11 Districts and is controlled by the State Committee, namely the MPCC. But, in the final analysis, the real people who run the show in the Party are those who held the post of Chief Minister and the President of the State Committee. However, to be more precise, the state Congress here in Meghalaya in the past 45 years used to be controlled by whoever occupies the office of the Chief Minister. Today, this is even more pronounced. During the last ten years or so the government of Meghalaya was run by one man. There was no dissenting voices; at least those voices are not heard in the corridors of power or by the public at large, except by one miniscule leader. You may disagree with me, but the Chief Minister today, is not only controlling the affairs of the Government of the state but also that of the Party. The state PCC Chief, who last year nearly managed to unseat the present Chief Minister, is today under the control of the Chief Minister. This will not be healthy for the present and future of the Party. It was often claimed that this party is democratic. That is a misnomer. In practice it is not. The very fact that all the affairs of the party and of the government, if it is a Congress government, is left to be decided by the High Command proves that it is not democratic, The hard fact is that it is the people of Meghalaya who elect the Party and the Government; not the AICC or 10 Janpath.
The dissolution of a number of Congress Block Committees recently by the MPCC Chief is a clear proof of what I have stated above. You cannot dispense with people at your whims and fancies. Yet in the media the PCC has unashamedly stated, “No one in the party is indispensable”. Remember that you dealing with people and people make up the party. Remember that in the BCCs there are MLAs, many important office bearers and party workers who are strong pillars of the party, and the MPCC Chief nullified all that with a stroke of his pen without following the laid down rules in the party’s constitution ! If this is not arbitrary, undemocratic and dictatorship like then what is ? Does the MPCC President think he is doing this because he has no more stakes in this election or in 2023? Does he think this will build up the party or weaken it? And does he still think that this will help the party to win handsomely in the 2018 elections? The MPCC President may be jealous, suspicious and may dislike some people within the party whom he considers as rivals or smart guys who can take him on and unseat him one day, but he cannot dispense with them at his whims and fancies!. There are rules and regulations in the constitution of the party which ought to be followed not only in letter but also in spirit. If not followed then it is nothing short of cut throat politics or just following somebody else’s diktat? Too much of everything will surely bring downfall.
The Congress has lost power in Delhi and elsewhere because of such high-handedness and dictation from 10 Janpath and more importantly because of its owacts of omission and commissions, particularly rampant corruption.
Yours etc.,
Philip Marwein,
Via email