By H H Mohrmen
The election to the Autonomous District Councils of the state is at its crescendo, and everything is at stake for the candidates and the parties in the fray. The election this time is interesting because of the emergence of the new political party. It is a crucial election because it is a make-or-break situation for the party. The VPP hopes the election will be a springboard because if the party wins the ADCs, then it can see itself as a contender for the bigger political platform. Otherwise, it might as well consider that the party’s journey ends before it even begins. The ADC election is crucial for other parties and candidates too for the same reason because it serves as a springboard for the parties and the candidates to the legislative assembly.
The UDP Manifesto
Reading the news reports about the manifestos of the different political parties, one of the main issues the UDP has identified is to do away with Para 12 (A). This indeed is a very important issue for the district council elections, but the same party is in the government, but did not take issue at the government level. In many cases, the same MDCs are also later elected as MLAs who forget the same Para altogether when they are in the assembly. The other equally important issue mentioned in the party’s manifesto is the Governor’s delay in giving assent to the bills passed by the ADCs. The Governor acts on the advice of the State Government, so the question is why the party needs to take the issue to the public when the same can be discussed at the level of the Government to which the party is also a part. As a person who works with the differently- abled people, the move to allocate 3% job reservation for differently-abled people is very much appreciated, but the Party can even go a notch higher and fight for the same allocation at the state level. The differently-abled people in the state are a neglected lot, as many of them have not been provided what is rightfully theirs.
Article 371 is a non-issue
The debate on Article 371 is all hypothetical; between the Sixth Schedule and the Article, it is like crying for the moon without considering the ground on which one stands. The VPP is banking heavily on the issue of Article 371 and even promised that the issue will be taken by the MP in the parliament. But everybody knows that it is difficult, if not impossible, for one MP to convince the entire parliament to even discuss the subject. My opinion is we can discuss the issue only if there is a possibility of having a huge majority in the parliament or if at all we have a State Government that can convince the Central Government to bring the amendment. As of now it is just an election issue for the party, and the less we talk about it the better. It is a complete waste of time to even debate the issue because not a single party in the state will, at any time in the future, have the influence or the majority to be able to convince the parliament to bring the change in the Constitution. The nearest example for us is the Naga issue, and in spite of the support they have from the people and the struggle that had taken them many decades with many lives lost during the insurgency, the issue still hangs fire. Debating about 371 now is like what Bah Prestone Tynsong had said: “Ngi pynbieit man ka san snem, ki ngop ruh man ka san snem” (We fool them every five years, and they also fall for it every time).
Election like any other
The change, if at all there is a change, is from bad to worse, and it started from the day the candidates filed their nomination papers. This year the numbers of supporters accompanying the candidates while filing their nominations have increased and are in their thousands. Jowai center was jam-packed with the different candidate’s supporters who came in all kinds of vehicles and caused a traffic jam in the town.
The situation is much worse on the day of the scrutiny for the candidate’s papers. Their supporters in the thousands accompanied almost all the candidates as if it was a day for the counting of votes. Supporters will definitely have to spend money to accompany their candidates for the filing of nomination and to come to the place where the scrutiny of the papers of their candidates was held. The question is who sponsored their trip?
VPP candidates can claim that their supporters came on their own, and other political parties will also say the same. The question, however, for the VPP is what is the objective of bringing a crowd even during the filing of nomination and scrutiny for papers if not a show of strength? Even if we are to believe that the supporters of the VPP candidates pay their own way to the center, it defeats the very principle the party stands for: not to fool people or take them for a ride. Why is there a need to bring supporters to the center if it is not for a show of strength? If the party is serious about eradicating corruption from the state, it should stop unnecessary spending during the election.
If the VPP as its chief claims is here to educate the public, it should have prevented such unnecessary spending of money and wasting of time for the common people. They should have advised their supporters to spend their time gainfully, as the crowd has nothing to do with the scrutiny of papers.
There is no difference in campaign style either; all indulge in the same style of hiring vehicles to ferry people from one campaign ground to another, installing pandals, hiring high-frequency sounds, and decorating the same, which of course has some cost. No party can do without it, and spending money during elections is the root cause of corruption. The test for the new party is to walk the talk and show to the voters of the state that it is a party with a difference; that they mean business and they are here to stay.
Holier-than-thou attitude
However, there is a common observation, which is unfavorable for the party. It is alleged that the general supporters of the VPP tend to behave like they are the only saviours of the jaidbynriew. As such they become arrogant and consider all oppositions who obstruct them from achieving their goals as enemies. The truth is many love the jaidbynriew and have tried to serve the state and its people in their own ways and as much as they can, but can they be treated as enemies just because they don’t think alike? Amongst the supporters of this party, now it is the ‘they/them’ and ‘us’ divide. It is our way or the highway kind of attitude. The party’s supporters even claim that now the fight is between ‘the light’ and ‘darkness,’ which is a very dangerous perception to hold because it considers others inferior.
The pride is seen in the way the party’s politics is constructed, which is a politics of confrontation almost at every front. Anybody who has an opinion different from theirs is considered an enemy, be it the press fraternity, the traditional heads, anybody who hold opinions different from that of the party’s are considered opponents. The response of the youth wings to the demand of the press club for the party’s supremo to apologize is a classic case in point. The party’s youth response is amusing, if not dangerous, when they said the reason that the demand should not be responded to is because the letter from the media seeking apology from the VPP was signed by a non-tribal person. One of the signatories of the letter is a non-tribal duly elected by the press fraternity to hold the post. Is the party going to try to interfere even in the election of the press club if voted to power? On a similar note will they allow their leader to pay heed if he is being summoned by a non-tribal officer or a non-tribal judge?
By dividing the public into the ‘us’ and ‘them,’ the party is taking the hoi-polloi on a dangerous and slippery path, and a divided Khasi Jaintia population will not augur well even for the future of the party. The VPP’s only strength lies in the Khasi Jaintia region, and if, like what happened now, the party is in a confrontational mode with many sections of the society, then the party’s future is in jeopardy. A divided Khasi Jaintia region will not help the party catapult itself to the state assembly.