Why the 2014 voter is different
--It is widely believed that voter population in the forthcoming parliamentary elections in India will be significantly younger than in past elections. But census data belie this belief. It is true that the share of eligible voters in total population rose by 3.5 percentage points in 2011 over that in 2001 but this is not equivalent to the voter population being younger.
--An examination of age composition within the voting population reveals that the proportion of younger voters has actually marginally declined between 2001 and 2011. Those above 18 and below 25 as a proportion of voter population have declined from 21.7% to 21% between the two censuses.
Likewise, those above 25 and below 45 have declined from 47.1% to 45.6% of eligible voters.
--Given the slow pace of change in age composition as reflected in these shifts over a ten-year period, it is unlikely that the situation would have fundamentally altered in April-May 2014 when India goes to polls.
Does this mean that the voter population today is more or less what it was in 2004 and 2009? Not by a long shot. ::::
The age composition of voter population may not have changed but the voter in 2014 will be vastly different from his past counterparts in terms of :
1.economic experience and
2.attitudes towards the government.
1.The key dimension along which the experience of the current voter population in general and the younger voter in particular is different from predecessor populations is the pace at which it has come to expect improvement in its economic fortunes.
DATA:
(In 1980-81, three decades after India had launched its development programme, real per capita income had risen by just 50% over that in 1950-51. Only in 1989-90 did per capita income turn twice the level in 1950-51. An average Indian who began his professional life at between 20 to 25 years of age in 1950-51 and retired after 35 years, did not see his income even double over the entire working life. Someone already 30 years or older and joining the workforce in 1950-51 retired without seeing his per capita income rise even 50%. This depressing scenario changed markedly for those entering the workforce in the 1990s and later. By 1999-2000, per capita income was almost three times that in 1950-51 and one and a half times that in 1989-90. The average worker entering the workforce in 1989-90 experienced within a decade such increase in prosperity as the average worker entering the workforce in 1950-51 had experienced after three decades. And the prospects for him got even better in the following decade.
By 2012-13, per capita income was nearly six times that in 1950-51, three times that in 1989-90 and twice that in 1999-2000. In other words, an average worker who joined the workforce in 1989-90 had seen his income triple and the one who joined in 1999-2000 had seen it double by 2012-13. )
Moreover, with the base income higher and higher, each 1% growth in successive years has been yielding larger and larger absolute improvement in fortunes.
That is the big difference today: a voter who is 45 years old or younger and therefore joined the workforce in 1989-90 or later is far more impatient than his older counterpart.
2.With prosperity has also come empowerment. Today's voter is far less likely to look to government for solutions to his problems than his counterpart of yesteryear. This is true even in areas in which government is supposed to be the main provider.
While government, media and NGOs keep pushing for more and more intervention by government in the provision of goods and services, a disillusioned and financially empowered voter has been progressively turning to private solutions.
Thus private schools have been progressively replacing poor-quality education in government-run schools. Even government school teachers who know much too well the woes of schools where they teach are using their higher salaries to send their own children to private schools.
Even the rural poor who lack access to private schools are seeking private tuition for their children, as the ASER 2013 report documents.
Many parents in urban areas choose to pack homemade meals for their children for fear that the free midday meal at school may be contaminated.
Whereas the only choice my generation had for medical care was a government-run hospital or dispensary, the vast majority of households in both rural and urban areas today go to mushrooming private providers. Private expenditures on health are more than three and a half times public expenditures nationally and reach as high as nine times in the state of Kerala.
It is this hunger for ever-greater control of their lives rather than caste and community equations that is guiding today's voter.
History shows last-minute goodies don't help incumbent governments retain power
--It is widely believed that voter population in the forthcoming parliamentary elections in India will be significantly younger than in past elections. But census data belie this belief. It is true that the share of eligible voters in total population rose by 3.5 percentage points in 2011 over that in 2001 but this is not equivalent to the voter population being younger.
--An examination of age composition within the voting population reveals that the proportion of younger voters has actually marginally declined between 2001 and 2011. Those above 18 and below 25 as a proportion of voter population have declined from 21.7% to 21% between the two censuses.
Likewise, those above 25 and below 45 have declined from 47.1% to 45.6% of eligible voters.
--Given the slow pace of change in age composition as reflected in these shifts over a ten-year period, it is unlikely that the situation would have fundamentally altered in April-May 2014 when India goes to polls.
Does this mean that the voter population today is more or less what it was in 2004 and 2009? Not by a long shot. ::::
The age composition of voter population may not have changed but the voter in 2014 will be vastly different from his past counterparts in terms of :
1.economic experience and
2.attitudes towards the government.
1.The key dimension along which the experience of the current voter population in general and the younger voter in particular is different from predecessor populations is the pace at which it has come to expect improvement in its economic fortunes.
DATA:
(In 1980-81, three decades after India had launched its development programme, real per capita income had risen by just 50% over that in 1950-51. Only in 1989-90 did per capita income turn twice the level in 1950-51. An average Indian who began his professional life at between 20 to 25 years of age in 1950-51 and retired after 35 years, did not see his income even double over the entire working life. Someone already 30 years or older and joining the workforce in 1950-51 retired without seeing his per capita income rise even 50%. This depressing scenario changed markedly for those entering the workforce in the 1990s and later. By 1999-2000, per capita income was almost three times that in 1950-51 and one and a half times that in 1989-90. The average worker entering the workforce in 1989-90 experienced within a decade such increase in prosperity as the average worker entering the workforce in 1950-51 had experienced after three decades. And the prospects for him got even better in the following decade.
By 2012-13, per capita income was nearly six times that in 1950-51, three times that in 1989-90 and twice that in 1999-2000. In other words, an average worker who joined the workforce in 1989-90 had seen his income triple and the one who joined in 1999-2000 had seen it double by 2012-13. )
Moreover, with the base income higher and higher, each 1% growth in successive years has been yielding larger and larger absolute improvement in fortunes.
That is the big difference today: a voter who is 45 years old or younger and therefore joined the workforce in 1989-90 or later is far more impatient than his older counterpart.
2.With prosperity has also come empowerment. Today's voter is far less likely to look to government for solutions to his problems than his counterpart of yesteryear. This is true even in areas in which government is supposed to be the main provider.
While government, media and NGOs keep pushing for more and more intervention by government in the provision of goods and services, a disillusioned and financially empowered voter has been progressively turning to private solutions.
Thus private schools have been progressively replacing poor-quality education in government-run schools. Even government school teachers who know much too well the woes of schools where they teach are using their higher salaries to send their own children to private schools.
Even the rural poor who lack access to private schools are seeking private tuition for their children, as the ASER 2013 report documents.
Many parents in urban areas choose to pack homemade meals for their children for fear that the free midday meal at school may be contaminated.
Whereas the only choice my generation had for medical care was a government-run hospital or dispensary, the vast majority of households in both rural and urban areas today go to mushrooming private providers. Private expenditures on health are more than three and a half times public expenditures nationally and reach as high as nine times in the state of Kerala.
It is this hunger for ever-greater control of their lives rather than caste and community equations that is guiding today's voter.
History shows last-minute goodies don't help incumbent governments retain power
Juxtapose elections with economic data over the last three decades and a few trends emerge. Voters are unlikely to be influenced by economic developments just before an election. Outcomes depend on a medley of factors. Past experience indicates that voters are unlikely to be swayed by the current round of goodies UPA is announcing. UPA needs to look no farther than the historic 1989 general elections, which ended one-party rule at the Centre. Rajiv Gandhi's government presided over a historic 10.2% growth the previous fiscal, but lost power. Was it high inflation or a combination of political and economic factors that cost them the election? The lesson's clear: voters are anything but simple-minded.
Despite plenty of evidence that voters are unimpressed by last-minute gimmicks, it is difficult to understand why incumbent governments still try them. The pattern shows up in assembly elections too. Rajasthan's recent verdict indicates that voters just don't fall for announcements of welfare measures or budget allocations. Ashok Gehlot's administration unleashed a veritable flood of welfare measures. It didn't pay off. If all it takes to retain power are a few pre-election goodies, incumbents would seldom lose.
The recent announcements, however, will impact the economy. It is difficult to understand the logic of diverting domestic gas from steel and petrochemical sectors to transport and cooking gas. It leads to dislocations in industry while consumers get a temporary cushion - domestic gas price is set to increase in April. Similarly, an increase in cooking gas subsidy will have to be accompanied by possible cuts in capital spending to meet fiscal deficit targets. Some of these distortions and spending cuts may have an adverse impact on economic growth. Incumbents are more likely to retain power if they focus on sustainable economic growth.
Will an increase in provision of subsidized LPG cylinders help UPA politically?
TIMES VIEW
Gimmickry does not pay
the government has raised the cap on subsidized LPG cylinders from nine to 12 a year. This is expected to cost the exchequer an additional Rs 5,000 crore. Economists may be uncomfortable with most subsidies, but politicians push for them as they may yield political dividend. The increase in provision of LPG cylinders, however, does not make for any meaningful political impact because it fails to satisfy conditions which allow for a subsidy to translate into political dividend.
A subsidy can pay political dividend if it benefits an adequate number of voters. Rural India is where most voters live and that also happens to be the area where there is limited access to LPG cylinders. According to Planning Commission, only 15.5% of rural households have access to cylinders. In effect, the debate on cylinders is simply irrelevant to most voters. About 66% of urban households have access to cylinders. But even among LPG consumers, raising the cap from nine to 12 cylinders merely expands coverage from 89% to 97% of consumers. This is a minuscule fraction of the electorate. Moreover, it is wealthier households that have greater access. Anecdotal evidence suggests that wealthier people are less likely to vote, which limits political gains from an increase in subsidy on cylinders.
Mere announcement of subsidies is unlikely to help a political party. An announcement must provide additional benefit and be backed by delivery. In the case of cylinders, what has happened over the last year is a reduction in an existing subsidy has been merely rolled back. In the case of cylinders, none of the conditions that allow for a subsidy to translate into political gains have been met. Voters are unlikely to be impressed by a process where subsidies are initially reduced and later restored.
COUNTERVIEW
It is a game changer
Pyaralal Raghvan
The government's decision to raise the annual cap on subsidized LPG cylinders is a major step that will boost electoral prospects of the UPA. This is because the move will help the government to take a major swipe at the problem of inflation and provide substantial relief to people harassed by rising prices in the last few years. Fuel prices, especially that of LPG, are an important cause of concern for the middle income group and the poor, who have been badly hit by soaring gas prices in the last few years.
This masterstroke can fetch electoral advantage as fuel prices have been a very sensitive political issue in recent times. Many point out that major gains made by Aam Aadmi Party in Delhi assembly elections were mainly due to its promise to bring down electricity tariffs, rises in which upset household budgets.
The increase in the number of cylinders can even be a game changer in the next Lok Sabha elections. A vote swing of even a few percentage points can have a major impact on political fortunes in three-way contests that are expected in most states. This is because most recent census numbers indicate that close to a third of the households are dependent on gas for cooking. And the argument is especially valid in urban areas where two-thirds of households use cooking gas. An increase in gas subsidies will create positive vibes in favour of UPA in urban areas, which account for more than 200 Lok Sabha constituencies. At this stage for UPA, anything that creates a favourable impression for many voters counts.
Despite plenty of evidence that voters are unimpressed by last-minute gimmicks, it is difficult to understand why incumbent governments still try them. The pattern shows up in assembly elections too. Rajasthan's recent verdict indicates that voters just don't fall for announcements of welfare measures or budget allocations. Ashok Gehlot's administration unleashed a veritable flood of welfare measures. It didn't pay off. If all it takes to retain power are a few pre-election goodies, incumbents would seldom lose.
The recent announcements, however, will impact the economy. It is difficult to understand the logic of diverting domestic gas from steel and petrochemical sectors to transport and cooking gas. It leads to dislocations in industry while consumers get a temporary cushion - domestic gas price is set to increase in April. Similarly, an increase in cooking gas subsidy will have to be accompanied by possible cuts in capital spending to meet fiscal deficit targets. Some of these distortions and spending cuts may have an adverse impact on economic growth. Incumbents are more likely to retain power if they focus on sustainable economic growth.
Will an increase in provision of subsidized LPG cylinders help UPA politically?
TIMES VIEW
Gimmickry does not pay
the government has raised the cap on subsidized LPG cylinders from nine to 12 a year. This is expected to cost the exchequer an additional Rs 5,000 crore. Economists may be uncomfortable with most subsidies, but politicians push for them as they may yield political dividend. The increase in provision of LPG cylinders, however, does not make for any meaningful political impact because it fails to satisfy conditions which allow for a subsidy to translate into political dividend.
A subsidy can pay political dividend if it benefits an adequate number of voters. Rural India is where most voters live and that also happens to be the area where there is limited access to LPG cylinders. According to Planning Commission, only 15.5% of rural households have access to cylinders. In effect, the debate on cylinders is simply irrelevant to most voters. About 66% of urban households have access to cylinders. But even among LPG consumers, raising the cap from nine to 12 cylinders merely expands coverage from 89% to 97% of consumers. This is a minuscule fraction of the electorate. Moreover, it is wealthier households that have greater access. Anecdotal evidence suggests that wealthier people are less likely to vote, which limits political gains from an increase in subsidy on cylinders.
Mere announcement of subsidies is unlikely to help a political party. An announcement must provide additional benefit and be backed by delivery. In the case of cylinders, what has happened over the last year is a reduction in an existing subsidy has been merely rolled back. In the case of cylinders, none of the conditions that allow for a subsidy to translate into political gains have been met. Voters are unlikely to be impressed by a process where subsidies are initially reduced and later restored.
COUNTERVIEW
It is a game changer
Pyaralal Raghvan
The government's decision to raise the annual cap on subsidized LPG cylinders is a major step that will boost electoral prospects of the UPA. This is because the move will help the government to take a major swipe at the problem of inflation and provide substantial relief to people harassed by rising prices in the last few years. Fuel prices, especially that of LPG, are an important cause of concern for the middle income group and the poor, who have been badly hit by soaring gas prices in the last few years.
This masterstroke can fetch electoral advantage as fuel prices have been a very sensitive political issue in recent times. Many point out that major gains made by Aam Aadmi Party in Delhi assembly elections were mainly due to its promise to bring down electricity tariffs, rises in which upset household budgets.
The increase in the number of cylinders can even be a game changer in the next Lok Sabha elections. A vote swing of even a few percentage points can have a major impact on political fortunes in three-way contests that are expected in most states. This is because most recent census numbers indicate that close to a third of the households are dependent on gas for cooking. And the argument is especially valid in urban areas where two-thirds of households use cooking gas. An increase in gas subsidies will create positive vibes in favour of UPA in urban areas, which account for more than 200 Lok Sabha constituencies. At this stage for UPA, anything that creates a favourable impression for many voters counts.
EC for making e-filing of nomination mandatory
2014 Lok Sabha polls will see most first-time voters
About 10 per cent of the voters during this Lok Sabha election are likely to be first-time voters, possibly the highest in any election, electoral data show.
Summary revision data released by the Election Commission on Thursday show that 2.3 crore people in the 18-19 age bracket have been enrolled to vote, out of a total electorate of 81.5 crore.
The Hindu ’s analysis of Census data show that there were 12 crore people in the 15-19 age group at the time of the 2011 Census.
They were too young to vote in 2009, but will be eligible to do so in 2014. These potential first-time voters formed 10 per cent of the population. The electoral numbers, combined with demographic data, show that the highest number of first-time voters this election is unlikely to be surpassed in the near future as fertility begins to decline — faster in the south than in the north — reflecting the peak of India’s ‘demographic dividend.’
In 2001, people aged 15-19 were 9.7 per cent of the population.
The United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs latest World Population Prospects shows that India’s 15-19 age cohort will peak in 2015 after which it will begin to decline as a proportion of the population.
The Election Commission’s data show that the proportion of 18-19 year olds registered to vote is the highest in Jharkhand (9 per cent of total electors), Chhattisgarh (4.9) and Rajasthan (4.8) and the lowest in Himachal Pradesh (1.3), Maharashtra (1.4) and Kerala and Karnataka (1.8).
Promises, promises
Nearly eight months after the Supreme Court ordered the Election Commission to frame guidelines on what parties extravagantly promise to voters ahead of elections, the EC has incorporated a set of prescriptions in its model code of conduct. It has consulted a range of parties on the subject. Now, it requires manifestos to “reflect the rationale” of a specific promise, and also indicate how these promises will be funded.
The Supreme Court’s judgment last July was on a petition that sought to declare Tamil Nadu’s big election blowouts on household items and welfare schemes for specific interest groups as “corrupt” acts. While the court stopped short of that declaration, its order to the EC stemmed from a sense that populist manifestos are irresponsible and parties must be made more accountable in their electoral appeals.
The Supreme Court’s judgment last July was on a petition that sought to declare Tamil Nadu’s big election blowouts on household items and welfare schemes for specific interest groups as “corrupt” acts. While the court stopped short of that declaration, its order to the EC stemmed from a sense that populist manifestos are irresponsible and parties must be made more accountable in their electoral appeals.
Well-meaning as it is, it is an unnecessary initiative on the EC’s part. Parties do not have to provide public justification on a private calculation or judgement call, and it is for voters to judge their priorities. It is not feasible to expect an informed financial plan for each promise, ahead of the party assuming power and working with the situation it inherits.
While the EC’s action is gentler than the Supreme Court judgment that held all giveaways and big promises as a distortion of the electoral playing field, it implicitly demands that manifestos be realistic documents, rather than trusting the voter’s judgement, her capacity to tell the difference between a transparent bribe and a genuine social benefit. It misunderstands the compact between the voter and the party. While it can be argued that competitive populism can create unrealistic and unmanageable expectations from government, even fostering cynicism when these promises are not met, it is not up to the EC or any external arbiter to enforce correctives.
While the EC’s action is gentler than the Supreme Court judgment that held all giveaways and big promises as a distortion of the electoral playing field, it implicitly demands that manifestos be realistic documents, rather than trusting the voter’s judgement, her capacity to tell the difference between a transparent bribe and a genuine social benefit. It misunderstands the compact between the voter and the party. While it can be argued that competitive populism can create unrealistic and unmanageable expectations from government, even fostering cynicism when these promises are not met, it is not up to the EC or any external arbiter to enforce correctives.
The EC enjoys tremendous public trust and credibility. Its model code of conduct, even though it lacks statutory force, has an indisputable legitimacy. This is largely because it is a restrained code, and does not venture into issuing dos and don’ts that are difficult to enforce or those that place excessive curbs on a party’s freedoms. It is essential for the EC to consider whether its contemplated actions actually advance fair and free elections, or stem from the misguided impulse of disciplining naughty parties.
India’s middle class awakes
There is an unfamiliar animal sprawled across the war rooms of most political parties ahead of the2014 polls. It is the Indian middle class. Not so long ago, its presence was insignificant. Hard-nosed political strategists dismissed it as of little consequence, and they could not be faulted. Most members of this class were self-righteously disinterested in politics; they voted but sporadically; their vision rarely transcended their immediate familial and municipal concerns; and their numbers constituted neither a tactically consolidated bloc, nor a significant numerical size.
But something has changed this time round. The docile, half asleep animal is stirring itself. And nobody is really sure of the consequences of ignoring its importance. There are tangible reasons for this turnaround. If we take a strictly economic criterion of defining amiddle class person as anybody who belongs to a household which has a monthly income of between Rs 20,000 and Rs 100,000 a month, the middle class starts to look very substantial. Estimates reveal that as per this criterion the size of the middle class in 1996 was a paltry 25 million. Today, it is in excess of 160 million. And, by 2015, its numbers are expected to go up to 267 million.
This is a very significant critical mass. It is pan-Indian in scale. It has a certain homogeneity, which while not entirely insulated from narrower regional or local considerations, gives it an identifiable commonality of interest. It is educated. It has similar aspirations, and similar expectation levels.
These attributes have been boosted by two very important developments. The first is instant connectivity. Almost every member of the middle class possesses a mobile. And a large part of it is an avid user of social media. Today, this is a class which is in instant and constant conversation with itself. Secondly, it now cohabits an era of 24x7 news. Its pan-Indian dispersal is unified by the relentless national dissemination of news, of which again it is the single biggest consumer.
More recently, the same nationwide mobilisation was visible during the peak of the Anna Hazare campaign in 2011 against corruption. The large crowds that thronged his public meetings consisted of large segments of the middle class. There were over 4 lakh people supporting his campaign on Facebook. One and a half crore calls were made to the designated phone number in Mumbai in his support. The Nirbhaya rape case in New Delhi in December 2012 again saw this class braving water cannons, shouting slogans, holding protest marches and courting arrest across the country.
Does all of this make the middle class a potent political entity? Yes and no. Yes because it cannot be ignored any longer. And, no because it is still disorganised; it does not have a pan-Indian leadership; its protests are largely limited only to matters which pertain to its own world; it is mostly oblivious to or indifferent about larger issues affecting those below it; and it has displayed a dismaying lack of sustained and in-depth consideration of the pros and cons of policy alternatives. Its anger on issues of lack of governance, corruption, women's safety and price rise is valid; but this anger has also been much too sporadic, often incoherent, and lacking organisational rigour.
The unpreparedness of the middle class for the national role it can potentially play has created a rather serious situation. Its numbers, accessibility and rising levels of anger at the state of things in the country provide a rich harvest for calculating politicians. But its inability to look beyond the immediate, and to posit an alternative vision that combines anger with a well considered blueprint for change, makes it rather easy cannon fodder for those who wish to exploit it. The challenge before the middle class is to contribute to national development with an equitable and comprehensive alternative vision that compels the political class to rethink its strategies on governance, populism, demagoguery, false promises, social divisiveness and electoral and financial malfeasance.
The national elections of 2014 will be a litmus test for the middle class. Mere display of anger will give it a short term importance; different political parties will fuel this anger for partisan short term ends; they will play to the gallery of middle class angst in the hope that this is all that is needed to seduce this class.
But the middle class must understand that anger and alienation without deliberation and carefulconsideration of what needs to change and in what manner, will be exploited, subsumed, subverted or derailed. For the first time since 1947 the middle class is a player in national politics. The time has come for it to make its choices carefully.
Election manifestos show that the low level of trust in society makes for unrealistic promises
India’s middle class awakes
There is an unfamiliar animal sprawled across the war rooms of most political parties ahead of the2014 polls. It is the Indian middle class. Not so long ago, its presence was insignificant. Hard-nosed political strategists dismissed it as of little consequence, and they could not be faulted. Most members of this class were self-righteously disinterested in politics; they voted but sporadically; their vision rarely transcended their immediate familial and municipal concerns; and their numbers constituted neither a tactically consolidated bloc, nor a significant numerical size.
But something has changed this time round. The docile, half asleep animal is stirring itself. And nobody is really sure of the consequences of ignoring its importance. There are tangible reasons for this turnaround. If we take a strictly economic criterion of defining amiddle class person as anybody who belongs to a household which has a monthly income of between Rs 20,000 and Rs 100,000 a month, the middle class starts to look very substantial. Estimates reveal that as per this criterion the size of the middle class in 1996 was a paltry 25 million. Today, it is in excess of 160 million. And, by 2015, its numbers are expected to go up to 267 million.
This is a very significant critical mass. It is pan-Indian in scale. It has a certain homogeneity, which while not entirely insulated from narrower regional or local considerations, gives it an identifiable commonality of interest. It is educated. It has similar aspirations, and similar expectation levels.
These attributes have been boosted by two very important developments. The first is instant connectivity. Almost every member of the middle class possesses a mobile. And a large part of it is an avid user of social media. Today, this is a class which is in instant and constant conversation with itself. Secondly, it now cohabits an era of 24x7 news. Its pan-Indian dispersal is unified by the relentless national dissemination of news, of which again it is the single biggest consumer.
More recently, the same nationwide mobilisation was visible during the peak of the Anna Hazare campaign in 2011 against corruption. The large crowds that thronged his public meetings consisted of large segments of the middle class. There were over 4 lakh people supporting his campaign on Facebook. One and a half crore calls were made to the designated phone number in Mumbai in his support. The Nirbhaya rape case in New Delhi in December 2012 again saw this class braving water cannons, shouting slogans, holding protest marches and courting arrest across the country.
Does all of this make the middle class a potent political entity? Yes and no. Yes because it cannot be ignored any longer. And, no because it is still disorganised; it does not have a pan-Indian leadership; its protests are largely limited only to matters which pertain to its own world; it is mostly oblivious to or indifferent about larger issues affecting those below it; and it has displayed a dismaying lack of sustained and in-depth consideration of the pros and cons of policy alternatives. Its anger on issues of lack of governance, corruption, women's safety and price rise is valid; but this anger has also been much too sporadic, often incoherent, and lacking organisational rigour.
The unpreparedness of the middle class for the national role it can potentially play has created a rather serious situation. Its numbers, accessibility and rising levels of anger at the state of things in the country provide a rich harvest for calculating politicians. But its inability to look beyond the immediate, and to posit an alternative vision that combines anger with a well considered blueprint for change, makes it rather easy cannon fodder for those who wish to exploit it. The challenge before the middle class is to contribute to national development with an equitable and comprehensive alternative vision that compels the political class to rethink its strategies on governance, populism, demagoguery, false promises, social divisiveness and electoral and financial malfeasance.
The national elections of 2014 will be a litmus test for the middle class. Mere display of anger will give it a short term importance; different political parties will fuel this anger for partisan short term ends; they will play to the gallery of middle class angst in the hope that this is all that is needed to seduce this class.
But the middle class must understand that anger and alienation without deliberation and carefulconsideration of what needs to change and in what manner, will be exploited, subsumed, subverted or derailed. For the first time since 1947 the middle class is a player in national politics. The time has come for it to make its choices carefully.
Election manifestos show that the low level of trust in society makes for unrealistic promises
Richard Thaler, an American economist who has done much to blend insights from psychology into economics, feels the best way to boost economic growth is to increase the amount of trust in society. He might propagate the view more aggressively if he looks at election manifestos in India. They suggest elections are an occasion to unveil a new plan for a race to the bottom. Surely, political parties led by experienced administrators know better than to promise durable prosperity by piling up debt. And voters, who will eventually have to pay off the debt, cannot be deemed gullible enough to take manifestos seriously. A low level of trust in society is the only explanation for this make-believe world of political theatre.
Chhattisgarh is an example of this phenomenon. One of India's poorer states, grappling with a Maoist insurgency, it is an example of how a political challenger can come up with an unrealistic manifesto. The Congress, which is trying to dislodge BJP's Raman Singh led government, has simultaneously promised 35 kg of free rice to most parts of the population and high support price for paddy farmers. In addition, farmers have been promised free electricity and interest-free crop loans. Chhattisgarh's Congress party members need only ask their prime minister what the fiscal consequences of their manifesto will be. A prosperous Chhattisgarh is an unlikely outcome.
Farther north, Delhi probably has the most aware electorate. It is unlikely that any other part of India could have been the laboratory to experiment with an unusual political formation like the Aam Aadmi Party. AAP's manifesto, however, shows the novelty is fading fast. The manifesto is a combination of disingenuous promises and blatant catering to interest groups. AAP will oppose FDI in retail to protect interests of traders. What about the rest of society? A cynical political party assumes support from the clearly defined beneficiaries of the promise will more than offset losses to the rest, as the latter are an amorphous lot even if more numerous.
AAP's manifesto shows the low level of trust makes it difficult for politicians to have an honest dialogue with people. It's still not too late, Arvind Kejriwal. A former income tax officer shouldn't shy away from telling people the liabilities that come with unrealistic promises.
Winds of change sweeping India, Pew Research Center survey says
NEW DELHI: Poriborton — the rallying cry of Mamata Banerjee in West Bengal — now appears to have a resonance across India. A survey by Pew Research Center has found that seven in 10 Indians are dissatisfied with the way things are and pushing for political change.
According to the survey's findings, popular dissatisfaction rules the airwaves: "Dissatisfaction is remarkably widespread, with such disgruntlement cutting across various demographic groups: men (72%) and women (67%); Indians aged 18 to 29 years (72%) and those 50 years of age and older (69%); those with primary education or less (67%) and those with a college education or more (75%); and people living in urban areas (72%) and those in rural areas (68%)."
Speaking to TOI, Bruce Stokes, director of Pew Research Center, said, "What we found most interesting was the degree of the desire for change (we didn't ask who people would vote for they may end up wanting change but still vote for Congress) which suggests that whoever leads the Lok Sabha faces a public that wants change."
By a margin of three to one, Indians, according to the survey are rooting for Narendra Modi's BJP to the Congress party. Roughly 78 per cent of Indians have a favourable view of Modi, while 16 per cent hold an unfavourable view, it says. Rahul Gandhi is not exactly unpopular —50 per cent of those surveyed hold a favourable view of him, while 43 per cent don't. About 63 per cent prefer the BJP to lead the next government, while only 19 per cent pick the Congress. Other parties get about 12 per cent support. According to the survey, support for BJP is consistent across age groups, and covers both rural and urban Indians.
But a clear flaw in the survey is the absence of Arvind Kejriwal as it has not factored in Aam Aadmi Party, the new political force which promises to shake up electoral calculations. Questioned on this, Stokes said, "While the survey came after the Delhi elections, the questionnaire, which had to be translated into 8 languages, was formulated before the polls and so we did not appreciate that AAP would win and thus failed to ask about Kejriwal. I wish we had, in retrospect, but it's one of the limitations of doing door—to—door interviewing. It's more accurate than say internet surveys but the lead times are far greater."
Modi's approval ratings are specially high in the northern states, where he is popular in both rural and urban areas, across income groups and among both educated and uneducated people. But surprisingly, the survey shows his popularity dipping in the western states. In the south, BJP has 59 per cent approval rating - some reason for the party to scramble to find suitable candidates in the southern states where it does not have a strong presence.
Gandhi's regional support is strongest in the east where the Congress is fighting for political space with Trinamool, JD(U) and BJD among others. The survey observes that there is a notable difference between the intensity of support for Modi and Gandhi. Nearly 60 per cent of those surveyed say they have a 'very favourable' view of Modi, while Gandhi polled merely 23 per cent 'very favourable' ratings.
The BJP has more than 30—point advantage over Congress on five of six issues surveyed: combating corruption (56% to 17%), creating jobs (58% to 20%), limiting rising prices (55% to 17%), reducing terrorism (56% to 20%) and helping the poor (54% to 21%). The BJP has a 28—point advantage over Congress on ending political deadlock. This means any BJP—led government in New Delhi after May 2014 would be under unprecedented pressure to deliver.
Just days ahead of the announcement of the Lok Sabha elections, the Union Cabinet on Friday increased the dearness allowance (DA) of Union government employees and dearness relief (DR) of pensioners by 10 per cent of the basic pay, taking the rate to 100 per cent.
According to the survey's findings, popular dissatisfaction rules the airwaves: "Dissatisfaction is remarkably widespread, with such disgruntlement cutting across various demographic groups: men (72%) and women (67%); Indians aged 18 to 29 years (72%) and those 50 years of age and older (69%); those with primary education or less (67%) and those with a college education or more (75%); and people living in urban areas (72%) and those in rural areas (68%)."
Speaking to TOI, Bruce Stokes, director of Pew Research Center, said, "What we found most interesting was the degree of the desire for change (we didn't ask who people would vote for they may end up wanting change but still vote for Congress) which suggests that whoever leads the Lok Sabha faces a public that wants change."
By a margin of three to one, Indians, according to the survey are rooting for Narendra Modi's BJP to the Congress party. Roughly 78 per cent of Indians have a favourable view of Modi, while 16 per cent hold an unfavourable view, it says. Rahul Gandhi is not exactly unpopular —50 per cent of those surveyed hold a favourable view of him, while 43 per cent don't. About 63 per cent prefer the BJP to lead the next government, while only 19 per cent pick the Congress. Other parties get about 12 per cent support. According to the survey, support for BJP is consistent across age groups, and covers both rural and urban Indians.
But a clear flaw in the survey is the absence of Arvind Kejriwal as it has not factored in Aam Aadmi Party, the new political force which promises to shake up electoral calculations. Questioned on this, Stokes said, "While the survey came after the Delhi elections, the questionnaire, which had to be translated into 8 languages, was formulated before the polls and so we did not appreciate that AAP would win and thus failed to ask about Kejriwal. I wish we had, in retrospect, but it's one of the limitations of doing door—to—door interviewing. It's more accurate than say internet surveys but the lead times are far greater."
Modi's approval ratings are specially high in the northern states, where he is popular in both rural and urban areas, across income groups and among both educated and uneducated people. But surprisingly, the survey shows his popularity dipping in the western states. In the south, BJP has 59 per cent approval rating - some reason for the party to scramble to find suitable candidates in the southern states where it does not have a strong presence.
Gandhi's regional support is strongest in the east where the Congress is fighting for political space with Trinamool, JD(U) and BJD among others. The survey observes that there is a notable difference between the intensity of support for Modi and Gandhi. Nearly 60 per cent of those surveyed say they have a 'very favourable' view of Modi, while Gandhi polled merely 23 per cent 'very favourable' ratings.
The BJP has more than 30—point advantage over Congress on five of six issues surveyed: combating corruption (56% to 17%), creating jobs (58% to 20%), limiting rising prices (55% to 17%), reducing terrorism (56% to 20%) and helping the poor (54% to 21%). The BJP has a 28—point advantage over Congress on ending political deadlock. This means any BJP—led government in New Delhi after May 2014 would be under unprecedented pressure to deliver.
Union Cabinet rolls out benefits package, hikes DA
Just days ahead of the announcement of the Lok Sabha elections, the Union Cabinet on Friday increased the dearness allowance (DA) of Union government employees and dearness relief (DR) of pensioners by 10 per cent of the basic pay, taking the rate to 100 per cent.
It fixed the minimum monthly pension paid by the Employees Provident Fund Organisation at Rs. 1,000. The new rate, effective from April 1, is expected to benefit 28 lakh pensioners.
The Cabinet approved the terms of reference for the Seventh Pay Commission set up to suggest wage and allowance revision.
The increased DA and DR, which will benefit 50 lakh employees and 30 lakh pensioners and family pensioners, will be given with retrospective effect from January 1 in cash, but not before the disbursement of March salary. The decision to increase the amount will cost Rs. 11,074.8 crore a year and Rs. 12,920.6 crore for 14 months from January 2014 to February 2015).
Eleventh hour decisions
As the Congress-led United Progressive Alliance Government races to fend off the imminent freeze on key policy decisions, when the Election Commission’s (EC) Model Code of Conduct for political parties comes into force before the 2014 General Election, a slew of last-minute decisions by the Union Cabinet a week after both Houses of Parliament adjourned sine die , comes as no surprise.
Most of the measures cleared by the Cabinet are part of a poll-eve image shoring-up exercise, while some of them may be a procedural necessity for any government in the last days of its tenure. Hiking the election expenditure limit incurred by a candidate for each parliamentary constituency to Rs.70 lakh from Rs.40 lakh for all the bigger States, should come as a big relief to most political parties facing both inflationary pressures and demands for greater transparency in poll-spending. At the all-party meeting recently convened by the EC to discuss this issue, only the Aam Aadmi Party is reported to have rejected the proposed hike on expenditure limits for both parliamentary and assembly constituencies, citing its 2013 ‘Delhi Assembly experiment’ of open accounting and spending.
Most of the measures cleared by the Cabinet are part of a poll-eve image shoring-up exercise, while some of them may be a procedural necessity for any government in the last days of its tenure. Hiking the election expenditure limit incurred by a candidate for each parliamentary constituency to Rs.70 lakh from Rs.40 lakh for all the bigger States, should come as a big relief to most political parties facing both inflationary pressures and demands for greater transparency in poll-spending. At the all-party meeting recently convened by the EC to discuss this issue, only the Aam Aadmi Party is reported to have rejected the proposed hike on expenditure limits for both parliamentary and assembly constituencies, citing its 2013 ‘Delhi Assembly experiment’ of open accounting and spending.
Based on the broad consensus among most political parties, the EC had reportedly written to the Law Ministry to raise the cap on poll expenditure for each Lok Sabha and Assembly seat, factoring in “the cost inflation index, increase in number of electors and polling stations” among others.
The EC also sought to bring the expenditure cap in the northeastern and hilly States on a par with those in the plains and proposed a limit of Rs.54 lakh for them including States such as Arunachal Pradesh, Goa and Sikkim, besides Union Territories such as Chandigarh and Puducherry. Those limits earlier ranged from Rs.22 lakh (for Goa) to Rs.35 lakh (for Manipur). In the case of each Assembly constituency, the limit has now been hiked to Rs.28 lakh in all the major States, while it will be Rs.20 lakh in the smaller States and some UTs including Puducherry. The last upward revision was effected in February 2011. Further, the Cabinet approving a minimum monthly pension entitlement of Rs.1,000 under the Employees Provident Fund Organisation’s Employees Pension Scheme, to benefit 28 lakh pensioners including five lakh widows, is calculated to strengthen its pro-welfare stance. The reaching out to the organised sector by enhancing dearness allowance for Central government employees, a golden handshake to staff of the sick Hindustan Photo Films, besides other regional sops like clearing a new rail coach manufacturing unit at Kolar in Karnataka, and provision of funds to support four new National Institutes of Design are also in tune with this eleventh hour give-away approach.
The EC also sought to bring the expenditure cap in the northeastern and hilly States on a par with those in the plains and proposed a limit of Rs.54 lakh for them including States such as Arunachal Pradesh, Goa and Sikkim, besides Union Territories such as Chandigarh and Puducherry. Those limits earlier ranged from Rs.22 lakh (for Goa) to Rs.35 lakh (for Manipur). In the case of each Assembly constituency, the limit has now been hiked to Rs.28 lakh in all the major States, while it will be Rs.20 lakh in the smaller States and some UTs including Puducherry. The last upward revision was effected in February 2011. Further, the Cabinet approving a minimum monthly pension entitlement of Rs.1,000 under the Employees Provident Fund Organisation’s Employees Pension Scheme, to benefit 28 lakh pensioners including five lakh widows, is calculated to strengthen its pro-welfare stance. The reaching out to the organised sector by enhancing dearness allowance for Central government employees, a golden handshake to staff of the sick Hindustan Photo Films, besides other regional sops like clearing a new rail coach manufacturing unit at Kolar in Karnataka, and provision of funds to support four new National Institutes of Design are also in tune with this eleventh hour give-away approach.
EC calls for ‘ethical voting’
Ethical voting’ is the new theme with which the officials involved in various levels of administration will have to go forward and ensure that the inducements of cash, liquor and gifts will be prevented from posing a serious threat to the country’s democratic system.
The Election Commission of India has issued fresh guidelines defining the framework within which all the election machinery will have to work and take necessary action in the event of any violation.
Closure monitoring of the election expenditure by contesting candidates will be brought into force as curious ways of sending money to electors have come to the notice of the authorities in the recent elections in different parts of the country. One of this is illegal transportation of cash in the door panels of an SUV.
It was said that currency notes up to Rs. 1 crore were kept inside each door panel and thus Rs.4 crore were carried in a single SUV at one go, which is the most conspicuous vehicle in electioneering being used by contesting candidates and their aides these days.
Debate on model code enforcement
The model code of conduct (MCC), a set of legally binding dos and don’ts to the Union/State governments, political parties and candidates, which is operational with immediate effect with the announcement of general election schedule by the Election Commission, has revived the debate on the merit of its enforcement from the date of announcement rather than the date of notification of the poll schedule.
It was in 1991 that the Election Commission under T.N. Seshan first codified the MCC on the basis of an agreement with political parties.
However, the Commission’s decision to implement it from the date of announcement of the poll schedule has been a matter of disagreement.
Political parties have been arguing that the MCC should come into force only from the date of notification, particularly if a multiphase election tends to be long. For instance, in the latest case the gap between the date of announcement and notification for the first phase is nine days. The gap stretches to 43 days in the case of the last phase.
In a statement here, Shantaram Naik, Chairman of the Standing Committee of Parliament which had gone into the issue in August last year, expressed disappointment that the EC had chosen to ignore its recommendations to enforce the MCC from the date of notification.
A unique feature of the amended MCC, on the basis of a recent Supreme Court judgment, is that the manifestos of political parties should reflect the rationale for the promises and broadly indicate the ways and means to meet the financial requirements for implementing them. “Trust of voters should be sought only on those promises which are possible to be fulfilled,” the modified MCC says.
Mr. Naik maintained that it is not practical for parties to spell out the rationale of all promises as it would mean that government budgets, Central and State, must indicate the allotments to be made for the promises that are proposed to be made in manifestos, which are announced long after the date of notifications.
Explaining the basic objective of the MCC, Chief Election Commissioner V.S. Sampath told reporters: “The Election Commission would like to clarify once again that the model code is an instrument to ensure that the level-playing field is not disturbed during the course of elections... Any action which is taken by any authority will be examined with regard to these parameters.”
The MCC envisages that the Ministers shall not combine their official visit with electioneering work and shall not make use of the official machinery or personnel during the electioneering work; issue advertisements at the cost of the public exchequer for partisan coverage of political news to further the prospects of the party in power; announce any financial grants in any form or promises thereof; make any promise of construction of roads, provision of drinking water facilities; there shall be a total ban on the transfer of all officers/officials connected with the conduct of the election.
EC has declared Arunachal as most expenditure-sensitive State: CEO
With Arunachal Pradesh being declared as one of the “most expenditure- sensitive State” in the country, the Election Commission has constituted a high-powered committee to monitor election expenditure in the State, Chief Electoral Officer (CEO) C.B. Kumar said on Wednesday.
“The Commission, based on inputs has identified 23 Assembly constituencies [total 60 in the State] in six districts of the State as most expenditure-sensitive,” Mr. Kumar told a press conference here.
The districts are West Siang, East Siang, Kurung Kumey, Lower Subansiri, Papum Pare and East Kameng, the CEO said.
Targeted approach
“This time, we are going to have targeted approach instead of general approach to monitor election expenditure in these districts,” he said adding, the other districts would also be under the commission scanner. The CEO said, as per commission’s directions, election expenditure monitoring (EEM) teams like video surveillance teams, video-viewing teams, Media Certification and Monitoring Committee, flying squads and State surveillance teams have been constituted to check out any type of malpractices during elections.
“Banks have been asked to furnish daily reports on any abnormal withdrawal or deposit. Flying squads and State surveillance teams in each Assembly constituency will check all the vehicles to ensure that no unaccounted cash of more than Rs. 50,000 is carried by individual and political parties for election-related activities,” he said.
Lok Sabha polls in Arunachal Pradesh for two constituencies would be held on April 9, while notification would be issued on March 15 and last date for filing nominations has been fixed on March 22 next.
Scrutiny of papers would be conducted on March 24 while last date of withdrawal of candidature has been fixed on March 26 next. Counting of votes would take place on May 16.
Altogether 7,53,170-strong electorate, including 3,77,272 females, would exercise their franchise in 2,158 polling stations in the State and 664 polling stations in the State are inaccessible while 8 polling stations are having less than 10 voters, 20 have less than 20 voters and 105 polling stations have less than 50 electors.
The C Sector polling station at Itanagar has the highest number of 1,650 voters, while Malogaon polling station under Hayuliang in Anjaw district has only two voters.
The CEO informed that more than 15,000 government employees were being deployed to conduct the elections.
Besides, 13 senior officers have been appointed as State Nodal Officers.
Central troops
“Central paramilitary forces will be deployed throughout the State for creating a conducive environment in addition to the State’s security forces,” he disclosed.
The CEO said the commission was focusing on checking all kinds of inducements including cash, liquor and gift by any political parties.
Moreover, he said, adequate number of general observers, police observers and expenditure observers were being deployed in the State who would be coming from outside the State and would remain in the concerned district till declaration of the result.
On the movement of poll personnel and materials to inaccessible polling stations, he stated that movement would be done in advance and enough air sorties have been requisitioned for transportation of men and materials. — PT
Tyranny of the status quo
The need for reforming India’s murky electoral processes again attracted the attention of the Supreme Court last July, when it struck down a provision in the election law temporarily protecting those legislators who stood disqualified for certain types of criminal convictions, if they had filed an appeal within three months. The government tried to bring in an ordinance to restore the status quo ante but hastily capitulated.
Another Supreme Court judgement delivered just a week later turned down the request of a petitioner from Tamil Nadu, calling for a declaration that the promise of “freebies” to voters as part of poll manifestos of the main parties in that State constituted “electoral malpractice.” The Court ruled that the extant law related only to “electoral malpractice” by individual candidates. While parting with the case, the court expressed discomfort with the existing legal provisions and hoped that the legislature would enact “a suitable law” in this regard, but that, in the meanwhile, the Election Commission would take some steps to extend the scope of the existing Code of Conduct for political parties and candidates by including suitable provisions on such poll promises.
Another Supreme Court judgement delivered just a week later turned down the request of a petitioner from Tamil Nadu, calling for a declaration that the promise of “freebies” to voters as part of poll manifestos of the main parties in that State constituted “electoral malpractice.” The Court ruled that the extant law related only to “electoral malpractice” by individual candidates. While parting with the case, the court expressed discomfort with the existing legal provisions and hoped that the legislature would enact “a suitable law” in this regard, but that, in the meanwhile, the Election Commission would take some steps to extend the scope of the existing Code of Conduct for political parties and candidates by including suitable provisions on such poll promises.
This, they had suggested, could be done even prior to the announcement of an election programme as a special case, possibly by securing a consensus. The provisions of the Code of Conduct prior to a poll have been restricted to a period which commences with the announcement of the election which shall ordinarily not be earlier than three weeks before the commencement of the actual election schedule which is notified simultaneously with the election notification. This was the result of a cosy compromise arrived at by the Commission with the Union of India in a Special Leave Petition before the Supreme Court in April 2001. The Commission thereby formally bound itself to a position that it had not accepted fully earlier.
The Constitution has conferred overall responsibility for the “superintendence, direction and control” of elections to Parliament and to the State Legislatures on the Election Commission. Subject to laws made by the legislature, the “plenipotentiary” authority of the Commission to regulate the electoral process to secure a free and fair poll has never been in dispute. A one-man Commission took full advantage of this many years ago to issue electoral identity cards in all constituencies, mainly to prevent the impersonation of voters that was then rampant only in a few States or constituencies.
Penal consequences
This action has stood the test of time and has now been suitably embodied in the relevant rules. The Commission could have taken a speedy cue from the above observations of the Supreme Court to reassert the scope of its regulatory ambit, once an election was imminent, without waiting for a poll notification. The Code of Conduct, now in force, is in any case a weak document which does fairly little to secure a “level playing field.” Some of its provisions are contained in the law itself, failure to adhere to which entail penal consequences. All political parties and candidates are fully aware of these provisions. It is, in fact, on the ground of such misuse of official position that Indira Gandhi was convicted by the Allahabad High Court in 1975, temporarily changing the course of the history of Indian democracy.
Some of the major actions on the part of the main players to gain undue advantage in the coming elections have been particularly noteworthy. The prime ministerial candidate of the Bharatiya Janata Party went on record earlier voicing his opposition to the institution of the central Lokpal and has effectively aborted a similar institution from functioning in his own State. On the other hand, the vice-president of the Congress had, speaking in Parliament, asked for “constitutional status” for this post, which the law, as now passed, has not accorded. These parties joined hands to make a law at variance with their own pronouncements.
The hasty attempts to make the appointments to this institution, already controversial, will stop with the poll code kicking in. That the hurried bifurcation of Andhra Pradesh was for electoral gains by the major parties is a fact uncontested. The Commission could easily have aborted these major steps, taken prior to the poll. Also, the mad rush by the ruling party to dole out favours to groups of people or individuals, successfully beating the poll code in many cases, and some populist ordinances (with the President performing the Commission’s duty of objecting to some) are practices that have still not been dropped.
By a “consensus” early last month with major political parties, the limits of election expenditure by each candidate have now been increased in line with the “increased cost of living” from Rs.16 lakhs to Rs. 28 lakhs for an Assembly constituency and from Rs.40 lakhs to Rs.70 lakhs for a Parliamentary constituency. This would indeed be a joke if one takes note of the declared assets of many prospective candidates. Filing false expenditure returns is a malpractice which can invite disqualification. On proper scrutiny, many elected candidates could meet this fate.
There are recent illustrations, however, to show that big money alone cannot win elections, so there can be no doctrinaire objection to being more realistic and allowing for greater transparency, even if some reports claim even these “limits” are largely unutilised. The Commission can again review the matter and call for much steeper increases in these limits or even do away with them altogether in the ensuing elections. A fresh “consensus” would be ideal, but if this is elusive, a meeting with NGOs active in this field could help evolve better norms.
India in election mode
The numbers say it all. With about 81.45 crore people eligible to vote, India will witness a nine-phase election over a 36-day span covering 9,30,000 polling stations that will press into service 18,78,306 electronic ballot units — the largest and lengthiest democratic exercise in the world. The country added more than 10 crore voters since the last election five years ago, and significantly, those in the age group of 18 to 19 years will constitute 2.88 per cent of the total number of voters as against a mere 0.75 per cent in that age group in 2009. With security concerns in Jammu and Kashmir, the northeast and the Naxalite-affected areas adding to the problems of logistics, the Election Commission of India has done well to stick to a relatively tight schedule while taking into account school examination dates — most of the polling stations will be housed in school buildings — and festival days. Stretching the election period beyond this would have been unfair to the voters and candidates, who will have to go through a gruelling campaign in the middle of another harsh Indian summer. Among the new features in this general election would be the introduction of the ‘none of the above’ option in the electronic voting machines, and the adoption of a voter verifiable paper audit trail system in some constituencies.
But the election to the 16th Lok Sabha will be remembered not for the logistic difficulties and the sheer size and magnitude of the exercise. After ten years of the Congress-led United Progressive Alliance, this election will see corruption and governance as major issues, along with livelihood and safety concerns. The Bharatiya Janata Party, by announcing Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi as its prime ministerial candidate, is seeking to turn this election into a vote for a strong, able government that does not waver in decision-making. Unmistakably, the UPA coalition, with many of the allies pulling in different directions, and some of the Ministers caught in corruption cases, has come to be seen as weak and ineffectual. But also tapping into the voter fatigue with the UPA would be the new entrant, the Aam Aadmi Party, with its focus on institutionalised responses to ending corruption and delivering services. However, Indian elections have been known to throw up surprises. While there are clear favourites, and some dark horses, including those presenting themselves as the third alternative, India is too varied and fragmented a country for psephologists to make predictions with any degree of accuracy. Elections are also to be held to the Legislative Assemblies of Andhra Pradesh, Odisha and Sikkim. The Assembly of the new State of Telangana following the bifurcation of Andhra Pradesh will have to be formed after the constitution of the new House. There is a lot to campaign for in the coming weeks.
Elections — patterns and rules
There is a political storm coming, make no mistake about it. The signs are many, but the most important one is the state of the economy, and the accompanying disappointment, disgruntlement and disgust with the ruling dispensation. In addition, after the dates for Election 2014 were announced, streetfights commenced. There is apprehension that this might be one of the more violent elections, a forecast (not mine) that I hope, and predict, will decidedly not come true.
Most opinion polls, indeed all, suggest the following outcome. First, that the Congress is headed for at least a halving of its 2009 tally of 206 seats, a halving that should place the Congress at an all-time low. Second, that the Narendra Modi-led BJP is poised to make major gains in votes, and seats in the neighbourhood of 200, some 20-odd seats above the highest level ever obtained by the BJP (in 1999).
Assuming this forecast to be broadly correct, the important question that needs answering is what explains this phenomenon, which, until just six months ago, most pundits would have found incomprehensible. Many of them still do, but we will not know till May 16 and, until then, all we can do is make intelligent sense from the available data, and not infer sense from vague opinions.
I will interpret the sense of Election 2014 in this article, and the next article (slated for publication on March 11) will boldly make state-level forecasts for the two major parties, the Congress and the BJP, and their respective alliances.
A very long time ago, I learnt the first rule of elections: they are about negatives, the party (or candidate) that has a higher number of negatives loses. Again, exceptions are always present, but they are infrequent. This explanation helps to differentiate against the common back-of-the-envelope indicator — anti-incumbency. Look back at most elections, and you will find that summing up the negatives really does explain elections. But what about the surprise 2004 result, when the widely expected victory of Atal Bihari Vajpayee’s BJP-led coalition did not materialise? What were the negatives in that election? Possibly Godhra and the Gujarat riots; but more importantly, the nature of seat-sharing arrangements in a first-past-the-post parliamentary system. Between 1999 and 2004, both the major parties lost a 2 percentage point vote share — but the UPA gained 31 seats and the NDA lost 44 seats.
At the beginning of the election period some six months ago, the common assumption was that 2014 would be fought on traditional issues like secularism, caste and “inclusive” growth. Let us take a moment to ponder as to what it means to assert that voting is based on such determinants. Regarding caste: the assumption here is that a Yadav will vote for a Yadav, a Dalit for a Dalit, and a Meena for a Meena. To be sure, there are some people, perhaps many, who vote on the basis of caste. But what is relevant for election forecasting and analysis is whether the proportions are changing or constant. If constant, then there is precious little new information, or swing information, in patterns of voting. So the second rule of election analysis: it is the delta (the change) that matters.
The third rule, often repeated but rarely appreciated in India, is that the major negative in an election is the state of the economy. Exceptional circumstances of a war sometimes assume greater importance. But barring such extreme events, it is the economy that is numero uno. And there can be no better explanation for the importance of the economy than the pattern of voting behaviour in 2009, and (possibly) 2014. In 2009, for both growth and inflation, India had the best historical record ever: inflation average of less than 6 per cent per annum and growth average above 8 per cent per year. It was a consequence of the economy that the Congress was rewarded with an electoral gain of 61 seats in 2009, just one less than the 62 gained by the Congress in the Sikh pogrom-influenced vote of 1984. Today, the economy is in the worst shape ever, with growth almost half the rate achieved in 2004-08, and inflation double the previous rate. The opinion polls are just reflecting this reality.
But there are other negatives that are affecting the UPA’s chances in 2014. A universal perception is that the UPA, in the last five
years, has not offered any “leadership” — neither the chairperson of the party, Sonia Gandhi, nor the CEO, Manmohan Singh, nor the heir apparent, Rahul Gandhi. But isn’t there a problem here? Just above, it was stated that voters believed in this very same leadership in 2009 and rewarded the rulers handsomely. So what has changed in the last five years? The economy, stupid. And this is rule four for elections — between “leadership” and the economy, it is the economy that dominates.
years, has not offered any “leadership” — neither the chairperson of the party, Sonia Gandhi, nor the CEO, Manmohan Singh, nor the heir apparent, Rahul Gandhi. But isn’t there a problem here? Just above, it was stated that voters believed in this very same leadership in 2009 and rewarded the rulers handsomely. So what has changed in the last five years? The economy, stupid. And this is rule four for elections — between “leadership” and the economy, it is the economy that dominates.
If one were to believe the media, and especially fringe parties wanting to win over100 seats in Election 2014, the economy does not matter, perceptions are inconsequential and leadership is irrelevant — what only matters is corruption. Hence, whichever political party promises a substantial reduction in corruption will emerge victorious.
The results of the recently concluded CNN-IBN opinion poll, reported in the table, can shed some light on conflicting views. Modi scores well over Rahul Gandhi in six of the eight questions pertaining to economic and social issues, is tied for one and is at a loss in the question regarding Muslim issues. But even on this one question on which Rahul Gandhi has a big lead, almost a third of the Muslims favour Modi.
As the table makes clear, each question had three possible responses; the third response, towards the AAP and Arvind Kejriwal, is not reported in the interests of space. What is noteworthy, however, is that even on the question of “who can best control corruption”, Kejriwal scores 21, some 9 percentage points below Modi.
As we approach the final defining moment of Election 2014, there are many, not surprisingly, who do not see the writing on the wall. The traditionalists keep raising the same old tired issues, which the young and the youthful and the dominant discarded a long time ago. But let us wait for the forecast on March 11, and the results on May 16.
As we approach the final defining moment of Election 2014, there are many, not surprisingly, who do not see the writing on the wall. The traditionalists keep raising the same old tired issues, which the young and the youthful and the dominant discarded a long time ago. But let us wait for the forecast on March 11, and the results on May 16.
Don’t let in malicious content, EC tells social networks
The Election Commission has directed content managers of social networking sites to make sure that candidates do not post anything violative of the model code of conduct.
In a communication to major social networking sites, the EC has issued detailed guidelines for political advertisements that include obtaining certification for contents before putting them in the public domain.
The guidelines will be applicable to a range of Internet-based social media including Twitter, YouTube, Facebook and Wikipedia.
Expenditure
The networking sites have been asked to maintain expenditure incurred by political parties and individual candidates, and ensure that the content displayed by them is not “unlawful or malicious or violative of the model code.”
The guidelines have been issued as part of the EC’s efforts to address the problem of paid news.
“We have told the social networking sites to take pre-certification from Media Certification and Monitoring Committees at the district and State levels,” EC Director Dhirender Ojha said, addressing a workshop on the media’s role in the electoral process.
Clarify position on rights issues, Amnesty asks PM candidates
Amnesty International India has asked the declared and probable prime ministerial candidates of various political parties to clarify their positions on key human rights issues ahead of the Parliamentary elections.
“Political parties have sworn to uphold Constitutional values of justice, liberty, equality and dignity. But their leaders’ actions must reflect this pledge. It is essential for everyone to know where prime ministerial candidates stand on important human rights questions,” said Shashikumar Velath, Programmes Director at Amnesty International India.
Amnesty’s “14 for 2014” Campaign asks candidates to state their positions on issues including police reforms, marital rape, undertrial detention, impunity for armed forces, land acquisition, decriminalization of homosexuality, and freedom of expression.
The candidates approached include Rahul Gandhi, Narendra Modi, Jayalalithaa, Mayawati, Mamata Banerjee, Mulayam Singh, Naveen Patnaik, Nitish Kumar and Arvind Kejriwal.
“The next five years will show whether India is willing to be seen as a true global power by upholding human rights at home and abroad, or whether it will continue to be driven by politics and narrow conceptions of national interest,” said Mr. Velath.
The “14 for 2014” human rights charter calls on political parties to incorporate 14 key human rights issues in their election manifestos. It includes issues of business and human rights, reforms to the criminal justice system, violence against women, the death penalty, migrant workers’ rights, human rights through education, a principled approach to human rights abuses abroad, and ensuring the passage of an anti-torture bill in Parliament.
Importantly, it wants the probable prime ministers to hold armed forces accountable for human rights violations by repealing AFSPA and enact a law to abolish death penalty.
“Will you repeal Section 124A of the Indian Penal Code — which deals with the offence of sedition — which is inconsistent with international standards on freedom of expression? Will you disclose the details of the Central Monitoring System — including its permitted grounds of surveillance and the safeguards on its misuse — and ensure that it proceeds only after due consultation with the public deliberations in the Parliament,” are some of the questions submitted to the political parties.
UAVs to keep a watch during polls
Serving as electronic eyes, unmanned aerial vehicles to be deployed by the police will keep a constant vigil during the Lok Sabha elections in Kolkata and erstwhile in West Bengal during elections.
The UAVs, equipped with self-activated cameras, will man the skies during elections in sensitive constituencies to be identified by the Election Commission.
‘Twin nominations distort people’s faith’
Seeking to quash the provisions of the Representation of the People Act which permit a candidate to contest elections from two constituencies, a public interest writ petition filed in the Supreme Court by the Voters Party said that in case he/she managed to win from both, “he/she is bound by the existing law to vacate one of the seats, thereby forcing an unwarranted by-election and its related expenses.”
The petitioner said it acted against the fundamental principles of representative democracy,
besides distorting the faith of the people who elected him/her.
In such a situation, the elected candidate should bear the cost of the entire by-election in the vacated constituency.
The petition pointed out that prominent politicians had made it a habit of contesting from two constituencies, and many a time, they won from both. After the declaration of results, the winning candidate vacated one seat, warranting an expeditious by-election and consequent wasteful expenditure, given the spiralling cost of holding elections.
“The provision of law is very often misused by the contestants as a security/ insurance at the cost of the general public/taxpayer, which is forced to bear the burden of a candidate,” it said.
Let us begin with demographic facts. Except for Maharashtra where Marathas, of one kind or another, constitute about 33 per cent of the population, everywhere else, no caste, in a numeric sense, dominates any constituency.
Parties now increasingly use social media for campaign
With the growing power of social media, politicians who had so far shied away from the digital medium are now increasingly interacting with the youth through Facebook and Twitter this election season.
It was only last week that the West Bengal committee of the CPI(M) launched their official Facebook page and Twitter handle to compete with the tech-savvy Trinamool Congress.
Trinamool supremo Mamata Banerjee already has more than 6,50,000 ‘likes’ on Facebook while the party’s national spokesperson Derek O’Brien has more than 2,00,000 followers on Twitter. Besides this, the party has a regularly-updated website and accounts on both Twitter and Facebook to woo voters.
The state BJP, also new to the social media, is going aggressive in the digital war.
In a short time, its Twitter page has more than 11,000 followers while on Facebook they have more than 14,000 likes’
The caste bogey in election analysis
The great untruth that weighs on our minds, especially during the election season, is the correlation we make between caste and voting behaviour.
Demography and distribution
Let us begin with demographic facts. Except for Maharashtra where Marathas, of one kind or another, constitute about 33 per cent of the population, everywhere else, no caste, in a numeric sense, dominates any constituency.
West Uttar Pradesh is supposed to be a Jat stronghold, but the Jats constitute between 8-10 per cent of the population. Likewise, in the rest of U.P., the Yadavs rarely ever constitute more than 12-15 per cent in most parliamentary constituencies.
In Bihar’s Madhopura region which is reputed to be an impregnable Yadav stronghold, only 23-25 per cent of the people there belong to this caste.
If then in most constituencies there are five to six castes of roughly equal size, but nearly always two major contenders, imagine the strain this poses to simplistic arithmetic. With numbers such as these, most people are compelled to vote outside their caste even if that hurts. As nobody wants to waste their vote, circumstances force many to give their caste sentiments a rest when they enter the polling booth. After all, there are only two viable candidates in the fray, but the voters come from five or six different caste groups. This is why most of them return home after opting for someone they would not have tea with. Unsurprisingly, when psephologists and politicians use caste numbers to predict election results, they are almost always wrong.
That they go wrong even in the supposedly caste-ridden States of U.P. and Bihar does not appear to dent their confidence. Even in places like Madhopura, Arrah, Barka, Khagariya, where the Yadavs have a sort of significant presence, it is not as if Mr. Lalu Prasad Yadav’s people won every time. Or take U.P. too; during the period 1991-1998, there was no consistency in electoral outcomes in areas of high Yadav population, such as Azamgarh, Jaunpur and Ghazipur. In Maharashtra too one finds a similar trend. In constituencies where there is a high Maratha presence, such as in Bombay South, Bombay South Central, Ahmednagar and Kopargaon, the honours were distributed between different parties in the elections held between 1991-1998.
Urban bias and homogenising
So, if voters consider issues other than caste it is not out of the largeness of their hearts, but because of the force of numbers. Politicians, true to form, function differently, raised as they have been on patron-client networks. This is why when it comes to giving the ticket, appointing election agents and recruiting goon squads, they look for hangers-on from their own caste and kin groups first. Sadly, most journalists reflect these caste calculations because of their proximity to political bigwigs. As their election jaunts with politicians in jeeps and planes are treated like scoops, they miss facts that are at a slight distance, and don’t even know it.
So, if voters consider issues other than caste it is not out of the largeness of their hearts, but because of the force of numbers. Politicians, true to form, function differently, raised as they have been on patron-client networks. This is why when it comes to giving the ticket, appointing election agents and recruiting goon squads, they look for hangers-on from their own caste and kin groups first. Sadly, most journalists reflect these caste calculations because of their proximity to political bigwigs. As their election jaunts with politicians in jeeps and planes are treated like scoops, they miss facts that are at a slight distance, and don’t even know it.
There is yet another reason why election specialists go wrong, and we may call this an outcome of an urban bias. From a distance it appears as if all those who belong to the category called “Scheduled Castes” (SC) or “Other Backward Classes” (OBC) look alike, think alike and are organically linked. This is another myth.
When the Marathwada riots exploded in Maharashtra in 1979, the Mahars, but not the other SCs, were the object of Maratha wrath. This prompted many Mang and Matang families to etch their caste names prominently on their huts to escape Maratha rage. Few would argue that Ms Mayawati is a champion of the Jatavs in U.P., but that does not say it all. The Jatav caste does dominate SC numbers in U.P., but there are large districts like Kanpur, Lucknow, Allahabad, Gonda, Rae Bareilly, Pratapgarh and Sonbhadra where SCs, other than Jatavs, have a larger presence. So, it is not as if all Scheduled Castes are in the same boat.
How else can one explain why the BSP lost every seat in 2002 in all the Sonbhadra constituencies of east U.P.? This is one of the districts were the SCs are dominant, but where the Jatavs have a lesser presence. Come 2007 and the situation undergoes a dramatic reversal; Ms Mayawati conquers the region. In 2012, another shift; this time Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP) loses half the territories it had won just five years ago. Even when we are talking about the SCs in U.P., and with Ms Mayawati on our minds, there is no clear caste correlation.
We make a similar error when it comes to the OBCs. From a distance, it seems, once again, that all these agrarian communities are one undifferentiated mass with earth in their toe nails, but that is where the resemblance stops. The Jats and Gujjars, for example, have a poor opinion about each other. In fact, there are popular tales and fables, that are related at the drop of a hat where one community calumnies the other.
For example, the Jats believe that because Gujjars sell milk, they could sell their family too. The Gujjars return the compliment by saying that the Jats had purportedly sold their souls to the British and that they could do so again to the highest bidder. Yet, we have often heard it being said that there is a caste logic that binds those listed in the OBC category. A quick visit to India’s villages will knock this fantasy out cold.
This should prepare us to look for reasons other than caste loyalties, or traditions, when we examine the rise of OBC mobilisation. Agrarian castes united, post-Mandal, not because they had traditional ties of solidarity, but because they felt deprived in a rapidly urbanising society. They saw opportunity in OBC reservations. There are always straightforward economic reasons behind many a caste manoeuvre. The same logic applied during the All India Kurmi Sabha of the 1930s. It had within its fold the Koeris, Ayudhyyas and Dhanuks whose caste rules did not permit them to even eat together. In later decades, the KHAM (Kshatriya, Harijan, Adivasi, Muslim) and AJGAR (Ahir, Jat, Gujjar and Rajput) combines made political bedfellows of disparate, often hostile, castes. They succeeded in this because livelihood interests make for good pillow talk.
Caste and patronage
Neither the Jats nor the Yadavs were a majority community anywhere. But it was their secular accomplishments that magnified their presence. In west U.P., for example, the Jats were the best placed in terms of official connections and literacy. It is because they controlled this “social capital” that the Gujjars and Sainis in the neighbourhood came to them for favours. If they wanted a job, file a complaint with the electricity board, or hide from the police, only a Jat worthy could help them out. The Yadavs played a similar patronising role elsewhere in east U.P. and in large parts of Bihar. From the outside, it was easy to come away with the view that areas like Meerut, Muzaffarnagar and Bijnor belonged to the Jats just as Madhopura and Khagariya were Yadav pockets.
The situation is changing. Over the past 30 years or so, other OBCs have managed to send forth their own band of notables from within their respective castes. This has diminished the aura that the Jats and Yadavs once had. The same process holds true for the SCs as well. At one time, the Mahars were the best connected among the SCs in Maharashtra just as the Jatavs were in U.P. With time, however, other SCs have also gained their own clutch of virtuosos: literati, schoolteachers, police inspectors, businessmen, and so on. Consequently, their dependence on the Mahars or Jatavs has, more or less, snapped.
Unlike the 1990s, caste and patronage no longer go together, not even within the OBCs and SCs. This is because there are now patrons, or near patrons, that come from many castes, whether from the SC or OBC category. There is then greater elite rivalry among castes making it difficult to play the caste card down the middle. Also, now that reservation has covered nearly all but the Brahmans, Baniyas and Rajputs, there is little that can be gained by agitating and mobilising along caste lines.
Politicians have caught on to this which is why many of them, turncoat style, are now talking about development instead.
Debating the secular-communal divide
Come election time and we invariably indulge in India’s very own “Great Debate” on the secular-communal divide in our democracy. While the Left and regional parties, that wish to either launch a third alternative or align with the Congress, resort to the need to keep communal forces at bay and maintain the secular fabric of the nation, the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and the Sangh Parivar lament minority appeasement and vote-bank politics and instead suggest universal development and providing education and employment to all. “Justice to all, appeasement of none” or “Sab ka Saath, Sab ka Vikas” is their newmantra . In terms of popular perception (that matters the most in democracy in general, but more so in the electoral season), this has now become almost an insurmountable divide.
Post the Sachar Committee report, there is enough data to prove that Muslims are badly off in terms of education and economic opportunities. In some cases, this means being worse off than even Dalits. Therefore, to make special provisions for Muslims, including demanding reservations on religious grounds or including them in the Other Backward Classes (OBC) category is only a necessary corrective measure. When Jats and Rajputs are being included in the OBC list and Gujjars in Rajasthan make the demand to be recognised as Scheduled Tribes, there is very little justification in denying Muslims their due share in the resources of the state. Even if the Constitution does not recognise affirmative action on religious grounds, there is enough sociological reasoning behind demanding special provisions for Muslims. Legal reasoning and pronouncements are not absolute. They need to be opened up to the emerging reality because many of the legal pronouncements themselves are based on no specific logic except in reinforcing popular perceptions about justice, including the cap on reservations not crossing 50 per cent that has no special logic except to maintain a perceived idea about merit, efficiency and equal opportunity in the system. Similarly, this skewed logic that special provisions encourage vote-bank politics has been a long-standing complaint not only with Muslims but also with regard to policies for Dalits and the OBCs. While the former is seen as minority-appeasement, the latter is believed to be aiding the flaring up of casteism in society. Recognising specific disabilities is not reinforcing the divide but only providing a corrective to the divide that already exists and is not created by such protective policies. Further, the idea that vote-bank politics is limited to Muslims and Dalits is itself a misconception perpetuated for way too long by the dominant social groups, both religious and caste-based. Is it not true that the upper castes and the upper classes vote as vote-banks in India? How else can one explain the popularity of the BJP in the urban areas and among caste Hindus? The dominant social-religious and caste groups take recourse to the reasoning of individual rational choice but have voted as clusters all along.
A discourse in crisis
However, the problem with the secular-communal divide does not end here. The language and discourse of secularism itself has entered an irretrievable crisis across the world. In Europe, the secular separation of religion and politics was followed up by multiculturalism as a preservation of cultural differences, which has only resulted in an increasing ghettoisation of religious minorities and the creation of “parallel societies” and demands, mostly on Muslim populations, to demonstrate loyalty, and adopt the “our” values of the dominant community. This has given a fillip to not only a separation of communities but also, what Slavoj Žižek refers to as “racism at distance.” Now, Europe is exploring the possibility of shifting from multiculturalism to pluralism in order to open up intercultural dialogic spaces. In India too, secularism has contributed to the entrenching of received ideas about religious minorities — mostly Muslims. It has rarely succeeded in opening up dialogue between religious communities. How much is known about what a majority of Muslims feel about M.F. Husain painting Hindu goddesses, or about Hindus being killed in Bangladesh or Baluchistan? There is an impending need to overcome the “fear” of listening to their voices. Similarly, in a democracy it is only proper to expect them to respond to forms of injustice that not merely hurt them but also other vulnerable social groups. As we do not expect women alone to speak up on women’s issues, or Muslims alone to speak on issues of communal violence, we cannot expect Muslims too to speak up only on issues related to religious minorities. It could in fact be argued that Muslim groups that protest against the exceptionalism of the state in Kashmir, and the witch-hunt in the name of terrorism and “suspect Muslims,” also speak up against these very methods against tribals in Chhattisgarh, and the citizens of the northeast. Unless the religious minorities do not come across as being “secular” themselves on some parameter, then the forces of the far-right will continue to exploit these silences for sectarian mobilisation. This is not to demand loyalty but to move beyond secular sectarianism in speaking for others. This is not a demand to prove the legitimacy of “their” belonging but a legitimate — dignifying — demand that ought to be made in any healthy democracy.
The search for the weak
The roots of communalism are fast shifting. They no longer exist “merely” in the memory of Partition or modern-day terrorism. They are in fact emerging from an entrenched caste psyche. Caste is a ladderlike structure with every group having a dual-positionality, with an oppressor above and the oppressed below. Keeping caste privileges and also undoing caste for every individual subgroup is as much about unsettling those above as keeping those below in their downgraded positioning. Anti-caste movements have exclusively addressed the atrocities of those above but never as much simultaneously articulated the caste hegemony towards those below by the very same sub group/sub caste. The momentum today is much in terms of maintaining this caste hegemony and subjugating those below. Subjugating those below is the most readily available strategy to undo the humiliation — as a quick psychological relief/empowerment — perpetuated by those above in the caste ladder. This reverse- osmosis of caste groups has led to a process of searching for and identifying groups that are relatively weak socially, politically and economically. This process goes down all the way to the smallest and most underprivileged caste groups. This is the psyche that allows for the dominant groups to self-represent themselves as victims, and the less-privileged as enjoying undue largesse and thereby as either opportunists with regard to Dalits or as aggressors with regard to Muslims. However, in this search for the weak, the buck seems to finally stop with identifying Muslims as the necessary “other.” They are weaker, perceived to be “outsiders”, and are perhaps the most vulnerable social group in India, combined with an imagination of the community as being aggressive.
The failure of the political project of building a “Bahujan Samaj” reveals the limits of the “secular upsurge” in India. The cynicism of the caste psyche that produces the Muslim as the “other” is ironically also the source to maintain and consolidate the Hindu fold against its internal fractures along caste lines for the Hindutva brand of mobilisation. Growing mobility for marginalised caste groups has resulted in increasing caste conflicts and, in turn, widespread communal violence. The entrenched sectarianism of the caste system cannot, however, be tackled with secular sectarianism that dithers from asking religious minorities to address issues of justice across religious and other social identities. Strangely, the Hindutva brand of politics seems to be a step ahead in articulating the idea of “justice for all,” which should have ideally come from those championing secularism and more so from the religious minorities themselves.
Women have had better success in polls, shows data
As parties go about finalising their candidates for the Lok Sabha elections, Punjab-based citizens’ group People for Transparency has come out with data that show that women candidates have had better success at the hustings.
According to the group, an analysis of the 2009 results showed that women have outdone their male counterparts in all major parties and eclipsed their party’s national success average. “The aim of bringing out this analysis at this stage is to draw the attention of political parties toward the winning potential of women,” said PT general secretary Kamal Anand. Though women are 49 per cent of the population and should ordinarily be given seats in proportion to their numbers, we believe that given their success rate, it is in the interest of political parties to give at least 33 per cent of the seats to women in this election.”
For instance, the group points out that the BSP fought the 2009 election in 500 seats, of which it won only 21 at a national success ratio of 4.2%. Out of its 28 women contestants, however, four won, taking the party’s national success ratio to 14.28 per cent. “Despite having a woman as its national president, only 5.6 per cent of the BSP’s candidates were women. Going by their success rate, the party would have been better off if it had fielded more women,” says Mr. Anand.
In 2009, the Congress gave tickets to 43 women — a mere 10 per cent of the party’s total contestant strength — out of whom 23 won the elections at a handsome success ratio of 53.48 per cent. The party’s national success ratio, on the other hand, was only 47 per cent in the 440 seats that it contested. “Other national parties — the Bharatiya Janata Party, the Communist Party of India, the Nationalist Congress Party and the Rashtriya Janata Dal — too allotted no more than 10 per cent of the tickets to women, though their eventual success rate was much better than the men,” said Mr. Anand. The BJP’s 44 women outdid the party’s national success average by three per cent.
“It is unfortunate that all politicians are today making tall claims that women are an asset to the country. Their actions speak louder than words — parties fail to allot women tickets in proportion to their population.
1 JOB OPPORTUNITIES
Rated the most important issue across most divides – gender, age, wealth categories, rural and urban. This is hardly surprising given the phase of jobless growth India has been going through in recent years. However, it is not necessarily the most important issue in every state. In fact, there are even states in which it is not rated among the ten most important issues.
In Kerala and Karnataka, this is not among the 10 top issues 2 DRINKING WATER
Like jobs, an issue that cuts across most divides. Interestingly though, it ranks second in urban areas but third in rural ones. Similarly, people from the high-wealth category rank it somewhat lower than those from relatively less well-off backgrounds. This is also true of very young voters as compared to the slightly older ones.
It’s the top issue in states like Tamil Nadu, Karnataka and Delhi, but not in the top 10 in Kerala 3 ROADS
Unlike jobs and drinking water, how important roads are ranked as an issue differs from segment to segment. For instance, it is the second top issue for rural respondents but only the seventh most important one for urban residents. Not surprisingly, it also ranks lower for those in the highwealth category than for those from lower economic strata.
It’s the top issue in Maharashtra and Rajasthan, but ranks only 10th in Kerala and 8th in Punjab 4 PUBLIC TRANSPORT
Its ranking as an issue varies quite a lot across different categories of respondents, though it remains in the top 10 in most cases. Surprisingly, it ranks as high as second for high-wealth individuals, an indication perhaps that good mass transit systems could reduce private vehicles significantly.
This ranks no. 2 as an issue in Gujarat, but is surprisingly not in the top 10 in Uttar Pradesh 5 ELECTRIC SUPPLY
While it remains an important issue for almost all categories of those surveyed, it is clearly a bigger issue in villages than in towns and cities, interestingly more so for men than women and also less important an issue for those on either extreme of the wealth range than for those in the middle. There are also states in which it doesn’t figure among the top 10 issues at all.
It’s the top issue in Bihar and ranked second in UP, but in states like Punjab, Karnataka and MP it is not among the 10 biggest issues 6 HOSPITALS
The lack of quality healthcare facilities obviously agitates nearly everybody, but the rankings show clearly how some have less access to good hospitals than others. It’s clearly more of an issue in villages than towns, among the poor than among the well-off and among the older lot than in younger respondents.
This is ranked 2nd as an issue in MP and third in Bihar, but in Andhra Pradesh, Gujarat and Kerala it does not rank among the top 10 7 SCHOOLS
Another issue on which the divide between the urban and rural areas shows up, with the latter clearly feeling the lack of good quality schools much more acutely. Across most categories, however, this issue ranks somewhere between 7th and 10th. The differentiation across states is more marked.
Among all states, Karnataka and Maharashtra ranked this the highest at no. 3
8 LAW AND ORDER
Yet again, rural respondents rank it higher than urban ones and, somewhat surprisingly, men rank it a more important issue than women. Across states, there is a very wide variation with some ranking it as high as 3rd and others not putting it in the top 10.
Predictably, it ranks as high as no.3 in UP, while in many others including most southern states, it is not in the top 10 9 EMPOWERMENT OF WOMEN
Once again, there is a visible rural-urban divide, with city and town dwellers ranking this the sixth most important issue but rural voters placing it 10th. There is, however, no real gender divide on this issue. The mid-wealth category seems less concerned about it than either of the two extremes.
It ranks as the topmost issue in Andhra Pradesh and as high as no.3 in Gujarat and no. 4 in Kerala, MP and Punjab 10 SECURITY FOR WOMEN
Nowhere is the urbanrural divide as clear as this. In urban areas, this is ranked the third most important issue. In contrast, rural respondents do not place it in the top 10 issues. Interestingly, however, the two genders do not rate the issue very differently.
This issue is not in the top 10 in many states, but ranks as high as no.4 in Andhra, Maharashtra and Gujarat
Bid goodbye to gerontocracy
AAP is reportedly going to include in its manifesto a pitch to reduce the minimum age of MPs and MLAs, to 21 years from the current 25. If the current problem of India’s political class is gerontocracy, then this could be one way of mounting an assault on this venerable institution, and therefore worthy of consideration. It would also be a logical corollary of India reducing its minimum
age for voting from 21 to 18.
Countries ranging from Australia and South Africa to the UK and Germany now allow everyone over 18 years to contest local to national elections. Being an exceptionally young country, India has all the more reason to move in this direction.
So if AAP is asking for reducing the minimum age of eligibility for being an MP or a MLA to 21, it’s a reasonable demand. Voices of youth don’t really get a fair, respectable hearing in political parties even when these are laying out an agenda for youth – because of the Bhishma Pitamah syndrome. Elders sit while younger people are supposed to stand. Or, elders appropriate the right to rule and youth have the duty to submit. These hoary claims perpetuate both injustices and inefficiencies. A more egalitarian private sector has already seen power dynamics shifting, with
deserving youth moving into the spotlight of both opportunity and responsibility. Government needs a similar conversion.
The anomaly of 25 as the minimum age for fighting assembly and parliamentary elections is of course accompanied by others like 25 as the minimum age for drinking in some states. It’s time to set the world aright, respect the young and give them all the rights they deserve. If people below 25 don’t have the maturity to represent a constituency, as the criticism goes, let the electorate be the judge of that.
No clueless babes-in-the-wood Chandan Nandy
The framers of India’s Constitution
rightly set 25 as the minimum age for candidates seeking to contest Lok Sabha or assembly elections. At 25, candidates get to form a settled worldview and reach a stability of character which one can hardly be expected to realise by 21. Besides, a 25-year-old advances in personal maturity and educational competence which provide him sufficient individual experience to command parliamentary trust. On the other hand, the political beliefs of 21-year-olds are crude, basic and often erroneous to have any substantive impact on public opinion, especially when India continues to be a democratising country where greater premium must be on individual wisdom rather on clueless babes-in-the-woods.
In successful democracies such as the US, the minimum age for contesting and holding public office varies from state to state with at least 20 having set it at 25. In at least five states, the minimum age required to serve as a senator is 30, while 35 is the minimum age for individuals seeking to contest the US presidential election. Much like the founding fathers of the American charter, framers of the Indian Constitution carefully determined 25 years of age as a reasonable basis of discrimination for those qualified to seek election to public office and those eligible to vote.
While it is a settled fact that age 25 is a good enough measure of maturity of judgment and understanding of political processes, political parties as well as the central and state governments must take a serious view on lowering the ages of consent and drinking. In six states, including Delhi, Maharashtra, Punjab, Assam and Meghalaya, the legal drinking age is 25 while in a few others it is totally illegal. If young men and women have the right to vote at 18, there is no reason why their aspirations and desires should remain bottled up in archaic laws.
Women’s empowerment may be the buzzword of new-generation politics, but a look at the demographic profile of newly-eligible voters shows that the share of women in the electorate aged between 18 and 19 years is way below the percentage of women in the country’s total electorate. Compared to 47.6% women in the national electorate as on February 14 this year, the fairer sex constitutes just 41.4% of the 2.3 crore electors in the 18-19 group.
As if the national picture were not alarming enough, the gender gap in newly-eligible voters is even more pronounced in the states. In 10 states and Union territories, women constitute less than 40% of voters in the 18-19 years age group. As many as 15 states and UTs fall short of the national proportion of female voters in this category, electoral data put out by the government on Thursday shows.
The worst-performing states include Haryana, where the percentage of female voters in the 18-19 age group is a shocking 28.3%, against 45.8% women in the state’s total electorate. Very young women voters in Maharashtra constitute just 35.5% of the 18-19 yearold electorate, followed by Punjab, Gujarat and Chandigarh (36.2% each), Uttarakhand (36.4%), Odisha (37.9%), Delhi (38.9%) and UP (39.6%).
Compared to eight states/UTs with a larger percentage of women voters, only Nagaland has more women electors in the 18-19 age group.
The other states/UTs faring better in terms of proportion of women in the 18-19 electorate bracket, are Mizoram (49.9%), Arunachal (49.6%), Lakshadweep (49.1%), Meghalaya (48%) and Goa (48.1%).
Among the bigger states, Jharkhand, Bihar and Madhya Pradesh have over 45%women enrolled in the 18-19 age group.
The percentage of male electors who joined the electorate this year works out to 58.6%, against the overall proportion of 52.4% men in the electorate. Interestingly, there are 28,341 electors listed in the electoral rolls as the third gender categorized as “others”. Of these, 4,177 voters, or 14% of the total electors in the “others category”, are between 18 and 19 years.
The EC, concerned over the lower enrolment of newly eligible women voters, has been targeting this category in its voter awareness programmes. As part of its Systematic Voters Education and Electoral Participation (SVEEP) initiative, the Commission and its partners are reaching out to young voters in college campuses through youth fests and campus ambassadors.
ADR-DAKSH NATIONAL VOTERS SURVEY
WHAT PEOPLE WANT
The Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR) and Daksh came together to conduct a survey of over 250,000 people across 525 Lok Sabha constituencies — perhaps the largest-ever such exercise in any one country. TOI brings you the issues people thought were most important, according to the survey. Corruption, interestingly, was not among the top 10!
1 JOB OPPORTUNITIES
Rated the most important issue across most divides – gender, age, wealth categories, rural and urban. This is hardly surprising given the phase of jobless growth India has been going through in recent years. However, it is not necessarily the most important issue in every state. In fact, there are even states in which it is not rated among the ten most important issues.
In Kerala and Karnataka, this is not among the 10 top issues 2 DRINKING WATER
Like jobs, an issue that cuts across most divides. Interestingly though, it ranks second in urban areas but third in rural ones. Similarly, people from the high-wealth category rank it somewhat lower than those from relatively less well-off backgrounds. This is also true of very young voters as compared to the slightly older ones.
It’s the top issue in states like Tamil Nadu, Karnataka and Delhi, but not in the top 10 in Kerala 3 ROADS
Unlike jobs and drinking water, how important roads are ranked as an issue differs from segment to segment. For instance, it is the second top issue for rural respondents but only the seventh most important one for urban residents. Not surprisingly, it also ranks lower for those in the highwealth category than for those from lower economic strata.
It’s the top issue in Maharashtra and Rajasthan, but ranks only 10th in Kerala and 8th in Punjab 4 PUBLIC TRANSPORT
Its ranking as an issue varies quite a lot across different categories of respondents, though it remains in the top 10 in most cases. Surprisingly, it ranks as high as second for high-wealth individuals, an indication perhaps that good mass transit systems could reduce private vehicles significantly.
This ranks no. 2 as an issue in Gujarat, but is surprisingly not in the top 10 in Uttar Pradesh 5 ELECTRIC SUPPLY
While it remains an important issue for almost all categories of those surveyed, it is clearly a bigger issue in villages than in towns and cities, interestingly more so for men than women and also less important an issue for those on either extreme of the wealth range than for those in the middle. There are also states in which it doesn’t figure among the top 10 issues at all.
It’s the top issue in Bihar and ranked second in UP, but in states like Punjab, Karnataka and MP it is not among the 10 biggest issues 6 HOSPITALS
The lack of quality healthcare facilities obviously agitates nearly everybody, but the rankings show clearly how some have less access to good hospitals than others. It’s clearly more of an issue in villages than towns, among the poor than among the well-off and among the older lot than in younger respondents.
This is ranked 2nd as an issue in MP and third in Bihar, but in Andhra Pradesh, Gujarat and Kerala it does not rank among the top 10 7 SCHOOLS
Another issue on which the divide between the urban and rural areas shows up, with the latter clearly feeling the lack of good quality schools much more acutely. Across most categories, however, this issue ranks somewhere between 7th and 10th. The differentiation across states is more marked.
Among all states, Karnataka and Maharashtra ranked this the highest at no. 3
8 LAW AND ORDER
Yet again, rural respondents rank it higher than urban ones and, somewhat surprisingly, men rank it a more important issue than women. Across states, there is a very wide variation with some ranking it as high as 3rd and others not putting it in the top 10.
Predictably, it ranks as high as no.3 in UP, while in many others including most southern states, it is not in the top 10 9 EMPOWERMENT OF WOMEN
Once again, there is a visible rural-urban divide, with city and town dwellers ranking this the sixth most important issue but rural voters placing it 10th. There is, however, no real gender divide on this issue. The mid-wealth category seems less concerned about it than either of the two extremes.
It ranks as the topmost issue in Andhra Pradesh and as high as no.3 in Gujarat and no. 4 in Kerala, MP and Punjab 10 SECURITY FOR WOMEN
Nowhere is the urbanrural divide as clear as this. In urban areas, this is ranked the third most important issue. In contrast, rural respondents do not place it in the top 10 issues. Interestingly, however, the two genders do not rate the issue very differently.
This issue is not in the top 10 in many states, but ranks as high as no.4 in Andhra, Maharashtra and Gujarat
AAP wants to lower minimum age for contesting polls from 25 to 21 years
Bid goodbye to gerontocracy
AAP is reportedly going to include in its manifesto a pitch to reduce the minimum age of MPs and MLAs, to 21 years from the current 25. If the current problem of India’s political class is gerontocracy, then this could be one way of mounting an assault on this venerable institution, and therefore worthy of consideration. It would also be a logical corollary of India reducing its minimum
age for voting from 21 to 18.
Countries ranging from Australia and South Africa to the UK and Germany now allow everyone over 18 years to contest local to national elections. Being an exceptionally young country, India has all the more reason to move in this direction.
So if AAP is asking for reducing the minimum age of eligibility for being an MP or a MLA to 21, it’s a reasonable demand. Voices of youth don’t really get a fair, respectable hearing in political parties even when these are laying out an agenda for youth – because of the Bhishma Pitamah syndrome. Elders sit while younger people are supposed to stand. Or, elders appropriate the right to rule and youth have the duty to submit. These hoary claims perpetuate both injustices and inefficiencies. A more egalitarian private sector has already seen power dynamics shifting, with
deserving youth moving into the spotlight of both opportunity and responsibility. Government needs a similar conversion.
The anomaly of 25 as the minimum age for fighting assembly and parliamentary elections is of course accompanied by others like 25 as the minimum age for drinking in some states. It’s time to set the world aright, respect the young and give them all the rights they deserve. If people below 25 don’t have the maturity to represent a constituency, as the criticism goes, let the electorate be the judge of that.
No clueless babes-in-the-wood Chandan Nandy
The framers of India’s Constitution
rightly set 25 as the minimum age for candidates seeking to contest Lok Sabha or assembly elections. At 25, candidates get to form a settled worldview and reach a stability of character which one can hardly be expected to realise by 21. Besides, a 25-year-old advances in personal maturity and educational competence which provide him sufficient individual experience to command parliamentary trust. On the other hand, the political beliefs of 21-year-olds are crude, basic and often erroneous to have any substantive impact on public opinion, especially when India continues to be a democratising country where greater premium must be on individual wisdom rather on clueless babes-in-the-woods.
In successful democracies such as the US, the minimum age for contesting and holding public office varies from state to state with at least 20 having set it at 25. In at least five states, the minimum age required to serve as a senator is 30, while 35 is the minimum age for individuals seeking to contest the US presidential election. Much like the founding fathers of the American charter, framers of the Indian Constitution carefully determined 25 years of age as a reasonable basis of discrimination for those qualified to seek election to public office and those eligible to vote.
While it is a settled fact that age 25 is a good enough measure of maturity of judgment and understanding of political processes, political parties as well as the central and state governments must take a serious view on lowering the ages of consent and drinking. In six states, including Delhi, Maharashtra, Punjab, Assam and Meghalaya, the legal drinking age is 25 while in a few others it is totally illegal. If young men and women have the right to vote at 18, there is no reason why their aspirations and desires should remain bottled up in archaic laws.
In 10 states, less than 40% new voters are women
Haryana Is Worst Performer; NE Shows Better Nos
Bharti Jain | TNN
Women’s empowerment may be the buzzword of new-generation politics, but a look at the demographic profile of newly-eligible voters shows that the share of women in the electorate aged between 18 and 19 years is way below the percentage of women in the country’s total electorate. Compared to 47.6% women in the national electorate as on February 14 this year, the fairer sex constitutes just 41.4% of the 2.3 crore electors in the 18-19 group.
As if the national picture were not alarming enough, the gender gap in newly-eligible voters is even more pronounced in the states. In 10 states and Union territories, women constitute less than 40% of voters in the 18-19 years age group. As many as 15 states and UTs fall short of the national proportion of female voters in this category, electoral data put out by the government on Thursday shows.
The worst-performing states include Haryana, where the percentage of female voters in the 18-19 age group is a shocking 28.3%, against 45.8% women in the state’s total electorate. Very young women voters in Maharashtra constitute just 35.5% of the 18-19 yearold electorate, followed by Punjab, Gujarat and Chandigarh (36.2% each), Uttarakhand (36.4%), Odisha (37.9%), Delhi (38.9%) and UP (39.6%).
Compared to eight states/UTs with a larger percentage of women voters, only Nagaland has more women electors in the 18-19 age group.
The other states/UTs faring better in terms of proportion of women in the 18-19 electorate bracket, are Mizoram (49.9%), Arunachal (49.6%), Lakshadweep (49.1%), Meghalaya (48%) and Goa (48.1%).
Among the bigger states, Jharkhand, Bihar and Madhya Pradesh have over 45%women enrolled in the 18-19 age group.
The percentage of male electors who joined the electorate this year works out to 58.6%, against the overall proportion of 52.4% men in the electorate. Interestingly, there are 28,341 electors listed in the electoral rolls as the third gender categorized as “others”. Of these, 4,177 voters, or 14% of the total electors in the “others category”, are between 18 and 19 years.
The EC, concerned over the lower enrolment of newly eligible women voters, has been targeting this category in its voter awareness programmes. As part of its Systematic Voters Education and Electoral Participation (SVEEP) initiative, the Commission and its partners are reaching out to young voters in college campuses through youth fests and campus ambassadors.
21 states have more women electors than national average of 41%
Haryana to introduce webcasting of polls
For the first time in the State, the election department of Haryana is all set to introduce webcasting of the poll process. Through this new initiative one can view live polling by clicking on the link ‘webcasting of polling stations’ on Chief Election Officer Haryana’s website www.ceoharyana.nic.in. The other initiative is ‘e-Dashboard’ through which one can have voting information of all the 10 parliamentary constituencies in Haryana.
Stating this here on Monday, District Election Officer-cum-Deputy Commissioner Shekhar Vidyarthi said in Gurgaon district, 44 polling booths located at 17 locations have been chosen for webcasting. He said that to view live polling on April 10, the day of polling, one will have to click on the link ‘Webcasting of Polling Stations’ on CEO’s website www.ceoharyana.nic.in and select the ‘Public Domain’.
According to Mr Vidyarthi, webcasting facility will be available at 11 polling stations of each of the four Assembly segments of Gurgaon district, which means that 44 booths will be under direct scrutiny of the officers as well as the public. On the day of polling, that is April 10, the voters enrolled in these selected booths would be able to see the number of voters present in the booth at the particular time. The web cameras in these booths will be installed in such a manner that each voter entering the booth will be visible.
The booths in Gurgaon Assembly Segment include Booth no. 49 and 50 of DAV Public School Sector 14 Gurgaon, Booth No. 59 & 60 of Dronacharya Government College, Booth No. 148 to 151 of DAV Senior Secondary School Khandsa Road Gurgaon and Booth No. 224 to 226 of Aravali Shri Ram Public School DLF Phase-IV Gurgaon.
Similarly, in Badshahpur Assembly Constituency, Booth no. 36 to 38 in Chiranjiv Bharti Public School Palam Vihar, Booth no. 70 to 72 of Tagore International School DLF Phase-3, Booth No. 75 & 76 of Shri Ram School Block-V Gurgaon, Booth No. 247 to 249 of Patio Club South City-II.
In Sohna Assembly segment, Booth No. 69 to 71 of Saini Dharamshala Sohna, Booth No. 73 & 74 of Office of DHBVN Ward No. 1 Sohna, Booth No. 75 & 76 of Government Senior Secondary School (Boys) Sohna, Booth No. 78 & 79 of BDPO Office Sohna and Booth No. 83 & 84 of Government Girls Senior Secondary Sohna.
In Pataudi Assembly Segment, Booth No. 36 to 38 in MLA Senior Secondary School Haileymandi, Booth No. 42 to 45 of Government Girls Senior Secondary School Haileymandi, Booth No. 96 to 98 of Government Senior Secondary School Manesar and Booth No. 99 of Scheduled Caste Chaupal Manesar.
Populism doesn’t win polls
Since Independence (in fact, for much of the early 20th century), the political landscape of India is dotted with multiple groups making demands on the state. With increasing political competition, electoral politics has become a mechanism to placate divergent group demands.
Over the years, a pattern seems to have emerged where territorial groups demand special packages (for example, Bundelkhand) or statehood (for example, Telangana). Social groups make community-specific demands, such as reservations (the recent inclusion of Jats in the Central OBC list), special status (as with minority status to Jains), or subsidies. Various state governments have also indulged in offering exclusive benefits to certain communities, such as unemployment allowance, free television sets, gold, free computers, etc. Elections in India have become an occasion for competitive populism, with the expectation that politicians can buy their way to victory. In this article, we show there is little evidence that populism wins elections.
Recent elections were no exception. Just before the 2014 election, the government announced reservations for Jats — a policy questioned by the Supreme Court and the National Commission for Backward Classes. Similarly, despite the Reserve Bank of India’s reservations, the Central government increased the number of subsidised gas cylinders available to voters.
The excessive use of freebies has even led the SC (judgment in S. Subramaniam Balaji vs Government of Tamil Nadu & Others on July 5, 2013) to intervene and ask the Election Commission to frame guidelines regarding what political parties can promise in their manifestos.
While parties seem to be engaging in this competitive populism, what is the evidence that these policies actually sway voters? Our research shows that these policies have little effect either on voter turnout or on support for a party. First, if populism (quotas or freebies) won elections, incumbent parties and their candidates would be less likely to lose. There is overwhelming evidence that suggests that incumbents face a big disadvantage in India, that is, their chances of re-election are lower than non-incumbents.
Second, the provision of quotas is no guarantee that the beneficiary group will continue to support the party that gave it quotas. Why? If one looks down the game tree, once a quota has been granted to a group, there may be no reason left for the group to continue supporting the party that gave it the quota. There is not much else the party can do for the group. The case of Jats in 2014 is a case in point. If populism in the form of extending reservations to the Jats would improve the electoral prospects of the party, the Congress should be doing better in the Jat-dominated areas of western UP, Haryana, Delhi and Rajasthan in the 2014 Lok Sabha elections.
Opinion polls, however, suggest otherwise. Jats are not supporting the Congress in these areas and the Congress is expected to do really badly in parts of western UP and Haryana. These quotas have another unintended negative consequence. Providing quotas to a local caste group like the Jats alienates other castes that oppose the Jats in specific areas. In UP, once the Congress gave Jats the “quota”, Muslims, especially in western UP, were further alienated from the Congress.
Third, for these goodies to have an impact on whom a voter votes for, it is important parties be able to monitor the vote. This is the case in countries like Argentina, where it is said that voters are given one shoe before they enter the polling booth and the pair is completed once a ballot has been cast in favour of the party. In India, however, this is not the case. The EC goes to extreme lengths to ensure the secrecy of the ballot. Data from the 2009 National Election Study (NES) conducted by Lokniti-CSDS suggests that most respondents say that, at the local level, political leaders can rarely figure out whom they voted for — that is, their ballot is secret. The secrecy of the ballot has one consequence, however.
All parties engage in handing out freebies to voters who then vote as they wish. Interviews with local politicians in Karnataka pointed out the dilemma that parties face. Politicians admit giving money to voters, but also admit that the money they give does not influence for whom the vote is cast.
Fourth, we carried out a randomised control experiment at a few polling stations during the 2011 assembly elections in Tamil Nadu to estimate the effect of freebies. Tamil parties — especially the DMK and the AIADMK — are known for their extensive use of freebies before an election. We found that freebies did not increase turnout, that is, those who were told of the freebies were not any more likely to vote than those who did not hear of them. We also found that those who were made aware of the freebies being promised by the DMK, were not any more likely to vote for the DMK. Similarly, those voters who were made aware of the freebies being promised by the AIADMK were not any more likely to vote for the AIADMK.
Fifth, and perhaps the biggest travesty of all, is that political parties offer freebies without informing voters about the fiscal impact of these policies. It stands to reason that if anyone is offered something free of cost they are not likely to refuse it. It is no wonder that parties advocate these policies because their own surveys may tell them of the overwhelming popularity of freebies, such as increasing the number of subsidised cylinders or giving 600 litres of free water to all citizens. Once voters understand the implications of such a policy, they are less likely to support freebies.
In a survey experiment carried out in Delhi in conjunction with Lokniti-CSDS (Tracker III poll in February 2014), a randomly selected set of voters we
re asked whether they supported the freebies given by the government. Another randomly selected set of voters were given additional information in terms of how much these policies would cost the exchequer and were then asked whether they supported these policies. Those who were given complete information, that is, given the cost of the policy, were far less likely (by about 12 percentage points) to support freebies.
re asked whether they supported the freebies given by the government. Another randomly selected set of voters were given additional information in terms of how much these policies would cost the exchequer and were then asked whether they supported these policies. Those who were given complete information, that is, given the cost of the policy, were far less likely (by about 12 percentage points) to support freebies.
The fact that freebies do not influence turnout, the vote choice or a party’s electoral fortunes does not mean competitive populism will go away any time soon. Politicians face a real dilemma. They know that, given a secret ballot and that all parties engage in competitive populism, voters can exercise their independent choice. No politician will, however, take a risk by not pursuing a policy that eschews competitive populism because of the fear that “if I am not giving out freebies and my opponent is, will I lose the election because maybe that is what is expected of me at election time?” In other words, we are in an equilibrium that seems hard to displace.
Will this election see a higher turnout?
While an increased turnout in Assembly elections is not an indicator of the same in Lok Sabha elections, aggressive campaigning points toward a higher turnout in this poll
If the pattern of turnout in the Assembly elections held over the last couple of years are of any indication, the turnout in the ongoing Lok Sabha elections should significantly increase. Almost all the Assembly elections held in different States between 2012-13 witnessed a higher turnout compared to those held in previous years. In Goa, Gujarat, Rajasthan and Uttar Pradesh, voter turnout increased by more than 10 per cent, while in Bihar, Karnataka, Manipur and Tamil Nadu, it increased by about 7-8 per cent. With voters more enthusiastic, and with political parties engaging in aggressive campaigning and mobilisation, there is little doubt that this Lok Sabha election would see a higher turnout.
But there is a catch. One must not forget that an increased turnout in the Assembly elections, which has always been higher, is not a guarantee for an increased turnout in the Lok Sabha elections. While all the five Lok Sabha elections held between 1996 and 2009 witnessed a turnout of 58-60 per cent (with the average turnout being 59.2 per cent), the 86 Assembly elections held in different States during the same period witnessed a 69.5 per cent turnout — smaller States like Sikkim, Manipur, Mizoram, Himachal Pradesh and Goa registered a much higher turnout compared to Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, Maharashtra and Madhya Pradesh. The average turnout in Assembly elections has been nearly 10 percentage points higher than the average turnout in Lok Sabha elections in the same period.
Factors for a higher turnout
The chances of a higher turnout in the 2014 elections would largely depend on the turnout among urban voters, women and young voters. Urban voters have always voted in lesser numbers compared to rural voters or voters living in semi-urban constituencies. During the 2009 Lok Sabha elections, in the 57 urban constituencies the turnout was 51.5 per cent, while in 144 semi-urban constituencies it was 61.2 per cent. This is nearly three per centage points higher compared to the national average turnout. In 342 rural constituencies, the turnout was 58.2 per cent — on a par with the national turnout. With growing urbanisation, the challenge for political parties to mobilise urban voters is much more in 2014 than it was in 2009.
The increased turnout in the recently-held Assembly elections was also due to a much higher participation from women voters. In the Lok Sabha elections as well as in the Assembly elections, the participation of women has been less than that of men. The gap between the turnout of men and women was much higher in the 1950s and 60s, but has narrowed down substantially in recent elections. However, participatory trends among women voters seem to have changed in recent years.
Not only are women participating more but have even outnumbered men in various States. During the 2010 Assembly elections in Bihar, 3.4 per cent more women participated than men. Uttarakhand witnessed a similar trend in 2012. In the 2012 Assembly elections in Goa, the turnout of women was 6 per centage points higher compared to men, while in Himachal Pradesh it was 7 per centage points higher. In many other States like Karnataka, Manipur, Meghalaya, Mizoram, Nagaland, Punjab, Rajasthan, Tamil Nadu, Tripura, Uttar Pradesh and West Bengal, which have also witnessed a lower turnout of women in past elections, women outnumbered men in recently-held Assembly elections. The turnout of women is crucial for an increased turnout in the ongoing elections.
There is lot of talk about young voters (aged 18-25). The past few Lok Sabha elections have witnessed a 4-5 per cent lower turnout of young voters compared to the average turnout. Contrary to the expectations of many, even the recently-held Assembly elections in Delhi, Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan and Chhattisgarh witnessed a lower turnout of young voters. While the youth supported the Aam Aadmi Party and even voted for it in Delhi, their electoral participation remains low. But there are a sizeable number of young voters in this election and they are more or less equally spread across constituencies. Their participation would play an important role in increasing the turnout.
Socio-economic order
Post-Mandal, electoral politics in India has witnessed more participation of voters from the lower social and economic order. Findings from the surveys conducted by the Centre for the Study of Developing Societies (CSDS) indicate that Dalits, Adivasis and Muslims now vote on a par with voters from the upper castes, which was not the case during elections held in the 1980s. Electoral participation in the 1970s and 1980s was dominated by privileged sections of voters — namely those belonging to the upper caste and the upper and middle class.
The rise of various regional parties having a strong support base among particular castes and their use of strong strategies for mobilising people has resulted in bringing about this change. Regional parties are still very strong — the All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam in Tamil Nadu, the All India Trinamool Congress in West Bengal, the Biju Janata Dal in Odisha, and the Telangana Rashtra Samithi, the Telugu Desam Party and the YSR Congress in Andhra Pradesh to name a few. There remains little doubt that these parties would leave no stone unturned to mobilise voters, especially from the lower strata, which would ensure sizeable electoral participation from these group of voters in these elections.
Watching the money flow
In line with the constitutional mandate to curb the corrupting influence of money power in elections, the Election Commission of India (ECI) has issued detailed guidelines and set up an elaborate administrative machinery to monitor the expenses of candidates and ensure a free and fair poll. The ECI’s detailed compendium of instructions on Election Expenditure Monitoring (ECM) that is updated and issued before every general election, has come on top of hikes effected in the election expenditure limit for each parliamentary constituency to Rs.70 lakh from Rs.40 lakh for the bigger States based on a formula linked to a cost inflation index. The bulky ECM compendium, that deals with matters ranging from maintenance of accounts by each candidate, training of election agents on expenditure monitoring, maintenance of registers, appointment of election expenditure observers for each constituency and preparation of daily activity reports by flying squads on seizure of cash and so on, to norms for political parties and even “the language in which the accounts of election expenses may be filed”, is bewildering in terms of its details.
Apart from the irritation some of these norms could cause to normal and bona fide day-to-day cash-carrying transactions by even ordinary citizens and businesses, the most hotly contested rule now, amidst the poll campaign, relates to adding the costs of campaigning by party leaders and star campaigners to the expenditure of individual candidates. The demands on time made on and security considerations of VVIP leaders who campaign for their respective political parties require a certain mode of campaigning that includes the use of aircraft and helicopters. This invariably involves high-cost logistics, besides expenses on special platforms and enclosures prescribed by security agencies to ensure protection. If the ECI accepts the basic logic that expenditure on ‘general propaganda’ of political parties should not be added to candidates’ expenditure, then it implies that some allowance needs to be made for their ‘star campaigners’ who lead those political parties. The general propaganda of political parties cannot logically exclude campaigning by leaders. Or else, it results in an anomalous situation of ‘star campaigners’ like Sonia Gandhi, Narendra Modi and Jayalalithaa having to campaign sans their party candidates. The leaders cannot even mention the names of a candidate, lest the candidate be burdened with a bill that includes the travel costs of the leaders and overshoots the ceiling. The experience with such a rule, as highlighted by Tamil Nadu Chief Minister Jayalalithaa and Union Finance Minister P. Chidambaram, should prompt the ECI to revisit the norm.
EC bans Amit Shah, Azam Khan rallies
Taking serious exception to the failure of the U.P. government to file an FIR against Urban Development Minister Azam Khan for his communal utterances and to check inflammatory speeches by BJP leader Amit Shah, the Election Commission on Friday directed the Chief Secretary to initiate criminal proceedings against the two and ban public meetings where they are expected to be present.
This is the first time since the Lok Sabha election process began on March 5 that the EC has ordered such a crackdown on hate speeches. Under Article 324 of the Constitution, the EC has vast powers to take action to ensure a free and fair election.
At an election meeting last week in riot-hit Muzaffarnagar, Mr. Shah, a close aide of the BJP’s prime ministerial candidate, Narendra Modi, said, “You have been treated as second-grade citizens. It is time for revenge now.”
He was shown on TV channels as also saying: “Batons, guns and swords belong to a bygone era. These days you take revenge by pressing the button.” Earlier this week, Mr. Khan hit the headlines with his controversial statement that it was Muslim soldiers who had won the Kargil war for the country in 1999 and that no Hindu soldier had died. The commission noted in its order that both Mr. Shah and Mr. Khan were yet to respond to show-cause notices. Referring to their statements, the commission said, these “are, inter alia, promoting feelings of enmity, hatred and ill-will and creating disharmony between different religious communities on the ground of religion.” Further, these provocative statements are highly prejudicial to the maintenance of harmony between different religious communities and also likely to disturb the peace and public tranquillity.”
These statements and public utterances were made with the “deliberate and malicious intention of outraging the religious feelings and religious beliefs of different classes of citizens of India.”
The EC maintained that their impugned speeches and public utterances were not only violative of the model code of conduct but also constituted serious offences under various provisions of the law. Flaying the U.P. government for not having acted with the required alacrity, the EC said the State government machinery was soft-pedalling action.
Changing scene, shifting tunes
What do you expect to see in a Congress manifesto? Big-buck schemes for rural India, right? And, what do you expect to see in a BJP manifesto? Shiny new infrastructure and big push to the economic growth rate, right?
Controversies around the much-delayed release of the BJP’s manifesto aside, the thing most striking about the manifestos for the 16th Lok Sabha elections of the two principal national parties is that they seem to have switched their traditional focus groups and approaches to public finance and the economy.
The Congress manifesto seems more ‘right’ and the BJP’s veering ‘leftwards’.
The Congress promise seems to be that it will temper its redistributive policies: It hasn’t promised a single new National Flagship Programme. The manifesto talks about a major cutback on subsidies. In fact, it promises to prioritise Central Government expenditure on infrastructure rather than ‘hand-outs’ and ‘national flagship programmes’. It ‘pledges to spend $1 trillion’ on high-speed rails, rapid transit systems, and a 100 new urban clusters — something that you would look for in the BJP’s manifesto.
The Congress manifesto delves in some detail on corporate India’s long-standing complaints against it, especially the ‘policy paralysis’. It proposes to fix the delays in project approvals through a National Investment Facilitation Authority, headed by the Prime Minister; a Bill for a National Environmental Appraisal and Monitoring Authority for ‘transparent’ and ‘time-bound’ clearances. In the wake of the ‘Vodafone’ controversy, the manifesto promises clear policy on tax treatment of foreign companies.
The manifesto goes a step beyond addressing complaints, and takes up even the holy cows with its promise of more ‘flexible’ labour laws and ‘protection’ for Indian industry from imports — something that even the BJP has not promised in its manifesto. With these and some more industry-friendly steps, the Congress says it hopes to lift economic growth from the current sub-5 per cent back to 8 per cent-plus in the next three years.
5 Ts and 3 Ds
The BJP’s manifesto, on the other hand, contains no specifics on the economic proposals. The BJP’s growth plan is to harness the ‘5 Ts’ — Tradition, Talent, Tourism, Trade and Technology — for capturing the advantages of the ‘3 Ds’ — Democracy, Demography and Demand. The plan itself reflects fuzziness. It doesn’t even mention a target gross domestic product (GDP) growth rate. Neither does it touch upon disinvestment. On the contrary, it proposes to set up a new public sector unit: The Organic Farming and Fertiliser Corporation of India. Perhaps too wary of its ‘India Shining’ fiasco image, the BJP has, in its manifesto, devoted more space and priority to ‘welfarism’. “Our government will be a government of the poor, marginalised and the left behind,’’ it says.
Whereas the Congress proposes to pass on the financial burden of its languishing national flagship programmes of UPA I and UPA II to the States so that it can spend more on infrastructure, the BJP says just the opposite: “We will empower Panchayat Raj Institutions with extensive devolution of the 3Fs — Functions, Functionaries and Funds.’’
Rural rejuvenation
The BJP manifesto promises “a full-fledged programme for rural rejuvenation” and that “will roll out a massive low-cost housing programme to ensure that by the time the nation completes 75 years of its independence, every family will have a pucca house of its own”. It promises a “Pradhan Mantri Gram Sinchayee Yojana”. It even promises to establish “Institutes of Technology for Rural Development”. Despite all its criticism of the Congress’s rights-based approach, the BJP clearly says it won’t abandon any of the Congress’ entitlement laws. Instead, it promises to build on them.
The Congress, on the other hand, has indicated that it is ready to move its focus away from rural India. Its manifesto says that the Congress’ promise ahead of the 2004 elections was “A New Deal for Rural India” and the mandate for it in 2009 was to “safeguard and advance the interests of India’s farmers”. Its election strategy in the last two elections was, thus, focused on rural Indians.
For 2014, however, the Congress has a new election strategy and target voter group. The manifesto promise is “to bring around two-thirds of our population — the skilled hands that build India — into the middle-class….” If the 2004 and 2009 manifestos had promises for rural Indians — entitlements such as the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act and the Right to Food — this time Congress has compiled a brand new set of rights for its new focus group.
What stands out for the Congress in these polls is the marked difference in its approach to the strategies for the new vote bank. The Congress seems to want to appear to be tempering its redistributive policies with a BJP-style take on people’s empowerment. “These rights will provide an economic platform for people below the middle-class to transform their lives and to transform India primarily through their own effort, not through any hand-outs of government,” the manifesto says.
Besides corruption and inflation, the strongest criticism of the ten years of the Congress-led United Progressive Alliance’s governance has been on its poverty-alleviation programmes being nothing more than instruments for dishing out ‘doles’ to poor voters.
In fact, the manifesto goes on to say “Given the limited resources, and the many claims on resources, we must choose the subsidies that are absolutely necessary and give them to absolutely deserving.” Subsidies find no mention in the BJP manifesto. And then the Congress manifesto springs an absolute unthinkable: “We will consider introducing sensible user charges…for better quality services, for example, uninterrupted power…” This, when it badly lost the assembly elections in Delhi on among other things to the Arvind Kejriwal-led Aam Admi Party’s promise of water and electricity tariff cuts.
The Congress manifesto doesn’t promise a single new flagship programme. Even on the existing ones, it says “States have the fiscal space to bear a reasonable proportion of the financial costs of implementing flagship programmes and must willingly do so, so that the Central Government can allocate more resources for subjects such as defence, railways, national highways and telecommunications that are its exclusive responsibility.”
Though it is not clear why States would want to take on greater financial burden of programmes that were conceived by the Congress at the Centre, but the point, however, is that the Congress has proposed to prioritise spending the Central Government funds on infrastructure rather than ‘hand-outs’ and ‘national flagship programmes’. Specifically, it “pledges to spend $1 trillion on upgrading India’s infrastructure in the coming decade.” What will this include? High-speed rail for all million-plus cities, 100 new urban clusters, regional rapid transit systems and so on.
To keep a check on the Congress’ infamous tendency for profligacy, the manifesto proposes to amend the Fiscal Responsibility and Budget Management (FRBM) Act “to codify a credible commitment of the government to achieve a fiscal deficit of 3 per cent of GDP by 2016-17 and stay below that always.” It further proposes to set up an independent FRBM Council that will submit an annual report to Parliament on the progress made on achieving fiscal commitments.
What does the BJP manifesto promise on fiscal consolidation? The single sentence: “We will strictly implement fiscal discipline without compromising on funds availability for development work and asset creation.” If Congress proposes to devote 3 per cent of GDP to health care, BJP promises 6 per cent of GDP to education.
And, on labour laws? The BJP manifesto promises a review, and that “We will ensure that the interests of labour in the unorganised sector are protected. For the organised sector, we propose to encourage industry owners and labour to embrace the concept of Industry Family” — a promise that could be mistaken to belong to a Left party document. The BJP also proposes to set up a ‘Workers Bank’ and to strengthen the pension and health insurance safety nets for all kinds of labourers.
While, the Congress has promised tax benefits for manufacturing of hardware and software to take on imports of popular brands for gadget presumably the Apples and the Samsungs; the only tax benefit the BJP promises is for setting up of old age homes.
If the Congress is grappling with the Modi factor, the BJP is still fighting the ghost of India Shining.
Staunching the vitriol
The Election Commission’s order banning two political leaders from addressing public meetings and rallies for their divisive and inflammatory speeches during the ongoing election campaign sends out a strong message to those who seek to exploit communal sentiments for electoral gains. Such resolute action is bound to find resonance with a vast majority of the people. For the past few weeks, the country has been subjected to venom and vitriol in the name of electioneering, as leaders of different parties have reduced canvassing for votes to distasteful rants against their adversaries. By making it clear that it would not only enforce the Model Code of Conduct, which bars appealing for votes on sectarian grounds, but also demand that authorities initiate criminal prosecution, the EC has demonstrated the full extent of its vast powers under Article 324 of the Constitution. If the threat by Congress candidate Imran Masood to “chop off” the hands of the BJP’s prime ministerial candidate, Narendra Modi, represented the nadir of this trend, his immediate arrest and remand ought to have had a moderating effect on others. However, Amit Shah, the BJP leader in charge of its Uttar Pradesh campaign, made an explicit call for revenge while addressing a meeting in riot-hit Muzaffarnagar. U.P. Minister Azam Khan of the Samajwadi Party sought to inject communal venom by claiming that the Kargil war of 1999 was won by Muslim soldiers alone.
These leaders now claim that they would clarify their remarks to the Election Commission, and seek to have the ban on their rallies lifted. However, the EC has noted that they had failed to respond to show-cause notices within the stipulated time. The Commission has said the U.P. government failed to respond to the offences with the required alacrity and was soft-pedalling action. Fresh FIRs have been filed in response to the EC’s rebuke. It is debatable as to what extent the police machinery can keep track of every inflammatory utterance, given the frequency with which the campaign has collapsed into divisive rhetoric, but there can be little excuse for responsible governments to delay action on egregious offences. If there is one purpose the EC’s firm action will serve, it is that the lethargy or indifference of the authorities towards this trend will end and there will be redoubled efforts to crack down on those making offending speeches. Yet one should also not fail to note that the leadership of various parties appears to be complacent, if not openly supportive, when it comes to provocative remarks by their own functionaries. Ultimately, the responsibility to stem the degeneration of political discourse lies with the political class. What is at stake is not a mere election victory but the credibility of electoral democracy.
By the ruling class, for the ruling class
In the next few weeks the gigantic exercise of conducting elections in India will be over. The nation will pat itself on the back for being crowned yet again the world’s greatest functional democracy while most people will get back to their struggle for survival. The long dance of democracy would come to an end, leaving the elected representatives to do the business of recovering their huge investments. A fortune is spent to conduct elections in India, rivalled only by the United States (it is said that in this election, Indian politicians would spend upwards of $5 billion as against $7 billion spent in the 2012 U.S. presidential election). All kinds of intrigues and foul play come into motion for acquiring money to fight elections. By any logic, these amounts can only be raised through plutocracy and crime. That being closer to the truth, one wonders whether this process of election needs to be probed for being at the centre of what ails India.
Trajectory of corruption
In a liberal framework, direct democracy is not possible. Elections are meant to get peoples’ representatives to operationalise democracy. Peoples’ choices however are restricted to the candidates put up by political parties, and to some independents, most of whom contest to help the electoral arithmetic of the main political parties as dummy candidates. This results in the same set of people getting elected election after election without any evidence of performance. The entire process has a kind of barrier of entry. For instance, the official expenditure allowed for a candidate for the Lok Sabha election is Rs.70 lakh that only mainstream political parties can afford. The actual investment is several times more. If this is the quantum of risk capital one invests in elections, there should be a theoretical return on this investment. Since there is none, it inevitably manifests itself as growing corruption. This has turned politics into a big ticket business with unrivalled returns. The elected leader becomes a feudal lord and the constituency his fiefdom, fortified by musclemen and money power.
The data on politicians who participate in elections are in the public domain, thanks to the Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR), that picks it up from their affidavits filed with the Election Commission and presents them in a manner that is comprehensible. These self-sworn data, likely to be a gross understatement, nonetheless reveal the rapidly growing number of crore patis among these representatives. In the 15th Lok Sabha election, there were 1,249 crore pati candidates, of whom over 300 reached Parliament. The crime record closely correlates with their riches, and both exist across parties. The parliamentarians with criminal cases belonging to the Congress and the Bharatiya Janata Party, the two main political parties, were 24 and 29 in 2004 respectively, which went up to 44 each in 2009. These are the so-called representatives of the people, a vast majority of whom live off Rs.20 a day!
More interesting is the incredible growth of their wealth before every election. The analysis by ADR and National Election Watch (NEW) has found that the wealth of 304 re-contesting MPs had grown by 289 per cent. These rates are almost unheard of even in the corporate world. A person of average calibre, ostensibly in service of poor people, outbeats the best of fund managers. In an ordinary case, such evidence would alarm the income tax and anti-corruption authorities; but the political connections of these worthies provide them immunity from such mundane risks. There are no prizes for guessing the sources of wealth here when it is known that the entire machinery works for corporate houses and other moneybags in the name of the people.
Method of election
When India became independent, the biggest challenge the new rulers faced was in fulfilling the aspirations of the people — the aspirations they helped build during the freedom struggle. These were further amplified by developments such as the dazzling progress made by the post-revolution USSR, the welfarist ethos of the post-War world, and the ongoing revolution in neighbouring China. The communal flare-up in the wake of the transfer of power, the integration of nearly 600 political fragments in the form of princely states within India, the communist-led armed struggles in certain pockets in the country, and the awakening of the lower castes collectively posed a formidable challenge to the new rulers. The republican constitution they created reflected these aspirations. However in real terms, the Congress Party that assumed the reins of power, represented the interests of the bourgeoisie and had to skilfully promote them. This tension between the need to appear addressing peoples’ aspirations — but in reality furthering the interests of capital — necessarily showed up in a series of its deceitful acts. Launching Five-Year Plans to display socialist orientation but clandestinely adopting the Bombay Plan created by the then eight top capitalists of the country, or to initiate land reforms but ensuring that they remained throttled so as to create a class of rich farmers as an ally in the vast countryside, or to push the Green Revolution to spread capitalist relations in countryside in the name of removing hunger, are just a few examples. It was politically imperative to adopt such a method for operating democracy to ensure that they remained in full control of power.
The First-Past-the-Post (FPTP) type of election system (in which the winner is the person with most votes) was chosen as a means to fortify the political power of the ruling classes. This system as such was inherited from the colonial regime like all other former colonies of the British Empire. But there was nothing that could have prevented India to discard it for the one better suited to its specific situation. The rulers ignored these considerations and rather focussed on their own interests which would be best served by this system. Most of the evils that we find ourselves engulfed in today stem from the FPTP system. A single winner in elections with such extraordinarily diverse polity could not come without the support of the majority party. It followed that most interest groups would be forced to come to terms with the majority party, paving ways for co-option and other manipulations. The diversity of interests in the country may still throw up many parties, which could only aggravate the inherently competitive FPTP elections. That in turn would only mean increasingly huge expenditure, to be met by big businesses, and the use of existing fault lines like caste, community and religion. It necessarily evolved into an oligopolistic power structure of all ruling classes, irrespective of parties, fortified by multilayered defences such as the police and the military.
Another model
Was there no alternative to FPTP? The diverse polity would point to a different model of election, say, the Proportional Representation (PR) system, which is followed in most European democracies and many others that have had far superior democratic records. While there are many practical variants of the PR system, essentially it entails voting for parties or social groups (rather than for individuals), that get representation in proportion to their share of votes. For example, Dalits in India are 17 per cent but being in the minority in every constituency, one of them would never get elected independently in the FPTP system; not even from the so-called reserved constituencies. The PR system would assure them their share in Parliament and legislatures and may even create a centripetal force to expand their constituency. What is euphemistically called bahujan today was possible to be created through this process. The social identities would make way for class consciousness and impart class orientation to the entire politics. There would be no cut-throat competition as every interest group would be reasonably assured of its share of representation. The competition would then shift to the ring of Parliament to shape the policies in the interests of the majority of the people. In the FPTP system, once the elections are over, there is no motivation for debate in Parliament on policy content. The most material policies of the government that impacted people (such as the imposition of Emergency and the neoliberal economic reforms) were never discussed in Parliament.
The theoretical fallacy in the FPTP elections that the elected representatives hardly enjoy consent of even half the voters is overcome in the PR system that ensures most interest groups their due share of representation. The intense competition of the FPTP elections leading to huge resource expenditure and consequent rise of corruption would also be eliminated in the PR system. Most importantly, in the context of India, it would curb the vile motives in the ruling classes to divide people on the lines of caste and community.
For instance, there would not be any need for the reserved constituencies for Dalits and hence even the Dalit tag, thereby eliminating the salience of castes from politics. Although, no system may prevent the black sheep being black, the PR system would surely eliminate the structural spaces by promising them their dues. Dalits lamented for years the Gandhian blackmail in the Poona Pact but did not understand that it was pivoted on the FPTP system. It would lose its relevance in the PR system. The same could even be extended to any need of preserving caste identities and vexatious problems they have created.
Indeed, India would hugely gain. But then, what will happen to the ruling class?
Huge turnout in sixth phase of polls
The 117 constituencies that went to the polls in the sixth phase of the Lok Sabha election on Thursday registered a record turnout.
In poll-related violence, five Jharkhand Armed Police personnel and three polling staff were killed in a powerful blast suspected to have been triggered by Maoists in Dumka in Jharkhand. A policemen was killed in Kokrajhar district of Assam when BSF jawans opened fire to ward off a mob trying to capture a booth.
In Mumbai, there was excitement till evening over whether voting would cross the 41.41 per cent mark recorded in the 2009 election. At the close of polls, the Maximum City registered a 52.66 per cent turnout in the six Lok Sabha constituencies.
The highest turnout of 82.13 per cent was recorded in Puducherry followed by West Bengal (82 per cent for six seats) and Tamil Nadu (72.8 per cent for all the 39 seats).
Only Rajasthan (59.2 per cent for five seats) and Maharashtra (55.33 per cent for 19 seats) registered below 60 per cent turnout, but in each case, the figure was higher than that of 2009.
Altogether 63.4 per cent polling was recorded in the third and final phase of polling in four Lok Sabha constituencies in Jharkhand, where the fate of 72 candidates, including the former Chief Ministers Shibu Soren of the Jharkhand Mukti Morch, Babulal Marandi of the Jharkhand Vikas Morcha-Prajatantric and Sunil Soren of the Bharatiya Janata Party, will be decided.
Congress-backed third alternative government possible, says Chavan
Maharashtra Chief Minister Prithviraj Chavan on Friday said a Congress-backed third front government was a possibility post-poll.
“I do not see a great possibility of the NDA’s prime ministerial candidate Narendra Modi getting the post. Even if the NDA gets the larger number of seats, allies may not agree to his being Prime Minister. A Congress-backed third front government could be a possibility,” he told a press conference here.
Meanwhile, Mr. Chavan’s statement earlier this week that regional parties should not be allowed to contest the Lok Sabha elections drew sharp criticism from the Congress ally, the Nationalist Congress Party. “It is the constitutional right for every citizen and political party to contest elections,” said NCP spokesperson Nawab Malik.
Mr. Chavan clarified: “I am concerned about political stability since we have thousands of regional parties. In Germany regional parties are not allowed to contest national elections. But my statement is just a suggestion which should be discussed.”
New Delhi: Faced with election commissioner H S Brahma’s public criticism of the handling of the Varanasi standoff on Friday, the Election Commission did a Uturn and appointed a special observer to oversee polling in the high-profile constituency where BJP’s Narendra Modi is being challenged by AAP leader Arvind Kejriwal and Congress’s Ajay Rai.
With Tamil Nadu chief electoral officer Praveen Kumar being named special observer, Varanasi district magistrate and returning officer Pranjal Yadav will have to take a back seat in the conduct of polls. Yadav has been criticized by BJP for alleged partisanship after he declined permission for a Modi rally in the city.
Kumar’s appointment marked a dramatic climbdown on the part of the EC, considering that chief election commissioner (CEC) V S Sampath had publicly defended Yadav and rejected BJP’s charge against him. ‘Weak leadership spoiled EC’s work’
The reversal appeared to have been caused by Brahma’s public criticism of EC’s handling of the dispute with BJP over the conduct of the returning officer. The election commissioner, who had on Thursday publicly interrupted Sampath, stunned many on Friday by telling the media that there were lapses by both the EC and Yadav in handling the confrontation. He also said the poll panel should have responded to BJP leader Arun Jaitley’s letter promptly, adding that the poll watchdog’s functioning had been hampered by its “weak leadership” — a notso-subtle allusion to Sampath.
Although Brahma later in the evening signed on to a statement issued by the EC projecting a united front, the public outpouring confirmed BJP general secretary Amit Shah’s claim earlier in the day that the poll body was divided over how to deal with the Varanasi returning officer.
In any case, the evidence of a split in EC had come on Thursday itself when Brahma interjected Sampath on the issue of whether Rahul Gandhi had committed a transgression when he entered polling booths in Amethi on May 7. “There is nothing grey about it,” Brahma had snapped.
The appointment of a special observer for Varanasi came after a marathon meeting of the three election commissioners. Although the details could not be ascertained, Brahma’s remarks in public, BJP’s comment about division in EC and, above all, Praveen Kumar being placed above Yadav in Varanasi suggested that Brahma could have spoken his mind to his colleagues, Sampath and S N A Zaidi.
The subsequent unfurling of the banner proclaiming unity could be part of the compromise that the three commissioners hammered out. The panel issued a statement, which it claimed had approval of all three commissioners, clarifying that the top leadership worked as a “team” and denying any undue delay on its part in acting on complaints.
“The commission would like to reaffirm that there is complete coordination among the commissioners and all decisions are taken after due deliberation and in unanimity,” it said. On Thursday, Sampath had said the Varanasi DM had only acted as per professional advice that cited security and situational concerns.Barely 24 hours later, Brahma went public with his deviation from this stand. At a press interaction, he said the undue delay on part of the Varanasi DM as well as EC in communicating denial of permission for Modi’s rally at Benia Bagh was not justified and that BJP should have been told in time to make all the
alternative arrangements.
For the full report log on
to www.timesofindia.com
EC blinks, appoints special poll observer for Varanasi
Day After CEC Defended Him, DM Sidelined
TIMES NEWS NETWORK
New Delhi: Faced with election commissioner H S Brahma’s public criticism of the handling of the Varanasi standoff on Friday, the Election Commission did a Uturn and appointed a special observer to oversee polling in the high-profile constituency where BJP’s Narendra Modi is being challenged by AAP leader Arvind Kejriwal and Congress’s Ajay Rai.
With Tamil Nadu chief electoral officer Praveen Kumar being named special observer, Varanasi district magistrate and returning officer Pranjal Yadav will have to take a back seat in the conduct of polls. Yadav has been criticized by BJP for alleged partisanship after he declined permission for a Modi rally in the city.
Kumar’s appointment marked a dramatic climbdown on the part of the EC, considering that chief election commissioner (CEC) V S Sampath had publicly defended Yadav and rejected BJP’s charge against him. ‘Weak leadership spoiled EC’s work’
The reversal appeared to have been caused by Brahma’s public criticism of EC’s handling of the dispute with BJP over the conduct of the returning officer. The election commissioner, who had on Thursday publicly interrupted Sampath, stunned many on Friday by telling the media that there were lapses by both the EC and Yadav in handling the confrontation. He also said the poll panel should have responded to BJP leader Arun Jaitley’s letter promptly, adding that the poll watchdog’s functioning had been hampered by its “weak leadership” — a notso-subtle allusion to Sampath.
Although Brahma later in the evening signed on to a statement issued by the EC projecting a united front, the public outpouring confirmed BJP general secretary Amit Shah’s claim earlier in the day that the poll body was divided over how to deal with the Varanasi returning officer.
In any case, the evidence of a split in EC had come on Thursday itself when Brahma interjected Sampath on the issue of whether Rahul Gandhi had committed a transgression when he entered polling booths in Amethi on May 7. “There is nothing grey about it,” Brahma had snapped.
The appointment of a special observer for Varanasi came after a marathon meeting of the three election commissioners. Although the details could not be ascertained, Brahma’s remarks in public, BJP’s comment about division in EC and, above all, Praveen Kumar being placed above Yadav in Varanasi suggested that Brahma could have spoken his mind to his colleagues, Sampath and S N A Zaidi.
The subsequent unfurling of the banner proclaiming unity could be part of the compromise that the three commissioners hammered out. The panel issued a statement, which it claimed had approval of all three commissioners, clarifying that the top leadership worked as a “team” and denying any undue delay on its part in acting on complaints.
“The commission would like to reaffirm that there is complete coordination among the commissioners and all decisions are taken after due deliberation and in unanimity,” it said. On Thursday, Sampath had said the Varanasi DM had only acted as per professional advice that cited security and situational concerns.Barely 24 hours later, Brahma went public with his deviation from this stand. At a press interaction, he said the undue delay on part of the Varanasi DM as well as EC in communicating denial of permission for Modi’s rally at Benia Bagh was not justified and that BJP should have been told in time to make all the
alternative arrangements.
For the full report log on
to www.timesofindia.com
Sensex and sensibility
The giddy rise in the Sensex is a measure of the anticipation that has gripped the country. Pundits have forecast a stable government and “those who know better” are predicting a period of growing prosperity. In such a period when reading the tea leaves is the prevailing fashion, let me add my own forecast to the many already on the table. I predict that the first test of the new government will not be in the area of public finance, or on the policies for economic growth, since measures that are to be taken to reboot the economy have already been identified, but will be on developing a policy framework on sensibility. The first test will not be on Sensex but on sensibility.
India’s essential pluralism
Let me explain. The new government will have to very soon pass what I shall call the A.K. Ramanujan test. This is a simple test based on just two articles that A.K. Ramanujan wrote on which the new government must take a stand. The first is: Is there an Indian way of thinking? For many members of the new government, the title would be enough reason for their cultural nationalism to be invoked. Of course there is an Indian way of thinking. Of course it is this thinking that makes us, as a people, superior to others because we have over millennia evolved a way of conceptualising our cosmos, and of our place in it, our Dharma shastras, that have been the basis of our grand civilisation. It is this Indian way of thinking, it is argued, that has produced the great Mahabharata and the Natya Shastra . This, Ramanujan would accept. But his position is more complex and more subtle than a superficial reading of the title may suggest, since he argues against a simple universalism, showing how, time, place, and community are all factors that qualify the moral law. The dharmic injunction is thus for anyone a combination of the universal and the contextual. Our challenge, therefore, is to identify the reasons why a particular combination is both relevant and right. Ramanujan’s reading serves as a powerful defence of the diversity of India, of the essential pluralism which is at the heart of Indian civilisation.
A stand on heterodoxy
Which brings me to the second article: “Three Hundred Ramayanas: Five Examples and Three Thoughts on Translation.” If the Indian way of thinking is right then we as a society have produced 300 Ramayanas. What will be the new government’s stand on A.K. Ramanajun’s second essay? I have raised the core issue of a government’s attitude to sensibility because I anticipate that in the next few months we are going to see all the little hecklers — who have shown their faces in the last few years demanding censorship of books, articles, cartoons, paintings, plays, films, photographs, a music band, discos, film songs, and even casual remarks about premarital sex — come out of the woodwork. Textbooks will come under scrutiny. Cultural organisations will face protest. Art works will be vandalised. Universities will develop a moral police and self-censorship will grow. All in the service of restoring the glory of Indian civilisation from the depradations of pseudo-secularism. The censors, both political and social, will demand forms of expression that do not offend. Sections of the IPC, 295A and also 153A will be used to silence expression that self-styled protectors of Indian civilisation find objectionable. Aubrey Menen faced it in 1956. Salman Rushdie in 1988. Wendy Doniger in 2014.
I have placed the issue of sensibility at the top of the new government’s agenda because its attitude to freedom of expression will determine whether it is truly committed to the wonder that is India. Let not the professions of loyalty to Bharat Mata, by the hecklers demanding censorship, deceive us. The truly loyal are those who appreciate the six schools of Indian philosophy, who see not just the Brahmana but also the S´ramana traditions, the Sufi and the Bhakti movements, the Syrian orthodox practices and the metaphysics of Kashmiri Shaivism, as part of our culture.
The list of what is to be included is too long to be presented here. But it must be noted that they are all a part of Indian culture. Faiz’s lamentations and Tulsidas’ prayers are as much a part of our tradition as Periyar’s scepticism. The new government will have to take a stand on such heterodoxy. Sensibility, as an aesthetic disposition, as a culture of appreciation of the diverse forms of cultural life, is what the new government will have to nurture and protect. Sensibility has to become a treasured national resource for the new age. Sensibility sustains society more than the Sensex. Man truly does not live by bread alone. We ignore this basic truth at our own peril.
The signs of the last few years are not encouraging. Lest the last three sentences are seen as being too rhetorical, more political bluster than philosophical depth, let me get scholars whose scholarship on Indian philosophy and culture is unquestionable to echo my views. I quote from the introduction of the first volume of the 20 volume series on History of Science, Philosophy and Culture in Indian Civilization , whose General Editor Professor D.P. Chattopadhyaya sets out the seven principles for inclusion of articles in the encyclopedic project. Elaborating on the second principle he states, “we try to show the linkages between different branches of learning as different modes of experience in anorganic manner and without resorting to a kind of reductionism, materialistic or spiritualistic. The internal dialectics of organicism without reductionism allows fuzziness, discontinuity and discreteness within limits.” Organic evolution, no reductionism, fuzziness, and discontinuity, all keywords that lead India’s intellectual life into a comfortable heterodoxy.
Freedom of expression conflicts
I mention this authoritative scholarship because I see the censors reappearing. Fortunately we have a new Chief Justice of India who has assumed office just as the new government will take its oath. In one of the first decisions of his term in office, he has recommended for elevation to the Supreme Court two outstanding senior advocates and ex-solicitors general of India. The Court is where the emerging Freedom of Expression (FoE) conflicts will have to be decided and direction given on the core principles of India’s constitutional democracy. If Indian civilisation is as plural as scholarship suggests, and if this plurality grows because of non-reductionism and organic evolution, and if we are to be enriched by the great dissenting traditions such as Buddhism, and if we are to nurture, for our civilisational benefit, some present day Ca¯rva¯kas, then the court must move beyond seeing FoE disputes only through IPC 295A and 153A and read them through 19(1)(a) and 19(2) of the Constitution. We need a new jurisprudence for a vibrant India and such jurisprudence must be a friend of FoE.
Democratic societies across the world have produced impressive case law on FoE, the most extensive being the United States where in defence of the first amendment fine distinctions have been made on content, intent, place, procedure, offence, etc, of hate speech. The Court has to go beyond asking for a report from the Law Commission on hate speech and be prepared to see FoE as part of basic structure. It must be prepared to act suo motu . We need to build first amendment type case law in India. We need to do so urgently. Soli Sorabjee, in an article titled “Freedom of Expression and Censorship: Some Aspects of the Indian Experience,” published in the Northern Ireland Legal Quarterly of 1994, concludes with the words of Madison endorsed by the SCI that “it is better to leave a few of its noxious branches to their luxuriant growth, than, by pruning them away, to injure the vigour of those yielding proper fruits.”
Which brings me back to the point that the new government must develop a policy on sensibility. If they fail the A.K. Ramanujan test then, as good Indians, we will give them a retest. And always in such cases the retest will be more difficult.
They will then have to pass a Namdeo Dhasal test.
(Peter Ronald deSouza is professor at the Centre for the Study of Developing Societies.)
Perils of non-disclosure
It cannot be a happy experience for a lawmaker when a hard-fought election victory is nullified on a mere technicality. Yet, legislators should now be wary of hiding, or not disclosing, the required information when they contest elections. This is the key takeaway from the latest Supreme Court verdict on a candidate’s failure to disclose all the relevant details in the prescribed form in the nomination papers. The act of voting is a form of free expression, and this right requires that voters are aware of all relevant particulars of a contestant. This is why the current election law casts an obligation on candidates to furnish information relating to their criminal antecedents, educational qualifications and assets held by them, their spouses and dependant children. The landmark Supreme Court verdict inAssociation for Democratic Reforms (2002) established that the Indian voter has a right to have all such information. Viewed in this light, the recent judgment in the case of Kisan Shankar Kathore, who won an Assembly election in Maharashtra in 2004, constitutes a significant decision. The Court upheld a Bombay High Court judgment setting aside Mr. Kathore’s election on the ground that he had failed to disclose his wife’s ownership of a bungalow, the municipal dues on it, and assets of a partnership firm, and dues that he personally owed to the Maharashtra State Electricity Board.
While confirming this judgment, the apex court has laid down two key points: non-disclosure of the spouse’s assets, in this case, or, as a general rule, suppressing essential information or furnishing false or incomplete information will be a ground for setting aside an election. Secondly, the fact that suppression of relevant information is an independent offence in electoral law cannot be a reason for leaving the validity of the candidate’s election unquestioned. The question did arise whether the Returning Officer’s acceptance of the nomination papers at the filing stage would not go in favour of the winning candidate. The Court has made it clear that the Returning Officer cannot be expected to hold a summary inquiry into some disputed facts and reject the nomination on the spot. Rather, it is a question that ought to be decided in an election petition. Whether the non-disclosure amounts to a material lapse or not would depend on the facts and circumstances of each case. The verdict places an additional burden on candidates to be diligent and conscientious in complying with norms of disclosure. At the same time, it is an uncomfortable truth that many years elapse before election petitions are decided, sometimes leaving invalid results survive the entire tenure of a legislature. It is incumbent on the courts to deliver speedier decisions on election petitions.
SC: non-disclosure of spouse’s assets ground for disqualification
Non-disclosure by a candidate of the assets and property owned by his or her spouse and children while filing nomination for an election is a ground for disqualification, the Supreme Court has held.
A Bench of Justices S.S. Nijjar and A.K. Sikri said it was not possible to reject a nomination at the time of filing on the ground that the candidate had suppressed information or given false information. However, if it was found after a proper enquiry that the candidate had failed to disclose information, non-disclosure would be a ground for disqualification.
“Otherwise, it would be an anomalous situation that even when criminal proceedings under Section 125A of the Representation of the People Act can be initiated and the selected candidate is criminally prosecuted and convicted, the result of his election cannot be questioned,” the Bench said. “This cannot be countenanced.”
In the instant case, Kisan Shankar Kathore was elected from Ambernath in Thane in Maharashtra. Arun Dattatray Sawant, a voter, challenged his election alleging that the appellant suppressed information on his wife’s assets as well as non-payment of electricity bill. The Bombay High Court held that non-disclosure had materially affected the election and held his election void. The present appeal is directed against this judgment.
Quoting an earlier verdict, the Bench said, “It was incumbent upon every candidate, who is contesting an election, to give information about his assets and other affairs, requirement of which is an essential part of fair and free elections. Every voter has a right to know about these details and such a requirement is also covered by freedom of speech granted under Article 19(1) (a) of the Constitution.”
The Bench added, “When the information is given by a candidate in the affidavit filed along with the nomination paper and objections are raised thereto, questioning the correctness of the information or alleging that there is non-disclosure of certain important information, it may not be possible for the returning officer at that time to conduct a detailed examination. Summary enquiry may not suffice.”
However, the Bench said that when the court, acting on an election petition, gave a finding of fact that there was non-disclosure of information it would result in his/her election being declared void and dismissed the appeal by Mr. Kathore.
At the national level, the story of votes (not seats) obtained by various parties and alliances is fairly straightforward. BJP and its allies got about 38% votes, Congress and its allies got 23%, the four major regional outfits — SP, BSP, Trinamool and AIADMK — got about 14% votes together, and the Left got about 5%.
Move from this big picture to the state-level shares of votes, and an intricate mosaic emerges. It reveals the huge strength of nearly a dozen parties at the state level. Note that the two big parties, BJP and Congress, have got just about 50% votes nationally — the balance is distributed amongst parties with regional bases.
The vote shares show the great advantage of the right kind of alliances, and the burden of dead wood. For instance, BJP benefited from key alliances with Paswan’s Lok Janshakti Party (LJP) in Bihar and the Telugu Desam (TDP) in Andhra Pradesh, while Congress managed to stay afloat in Bihar due to its tie-up with Lalu Prasad’s Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD).
One of the biggest surprises of this election was that no candidate of the Mayawati-led Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP) won in Uttar Pradesh, which is BSP’s stronghold, though it managed a creditable 20% of votes. In the outgoing Lok Sabha, it had 21 members.
There are other states where a similar anomaly can be seen. In West Bengal, the Left got nearly 30% votes but had to be satisfied with just 2 seats. In Tamil Nadu, DMK and its small party allies garnered 27% votes and got no seats. In Odisha, Congress got 26% votes but no seat while the BJP got 22% and just one seat.
The reasons for these bizarre results lie partly in the electoral system and partly in the specific nature of vote distribution. In the ‘first past the post’ system the candidate getting the largest number of votes in any seat wins. So, in a multi-cornered contest, a candidate with say 20% votes may win a seat because each of the others have individually got less than that. One well-known solution to this problem is adopting a proportional representation system in which seats are allocated according to share of votes, a system practiced in many countries.
But there is another factor to be kept in mind: the wave. In most of these states where parties with lots of votes have gone with less (or no) seats, there is one party which is getting bulk of the votes. In Tamil Nadu and in Odisha, the winning party — AIADMK and Biju Janata Dal respectively — got an overwhelming 44% of votes. So, even if you get 25% votes you lose badly.
In West Bengal, Mamata’s Trinamool Congress got nearly 40% votes, outstripping its main challenger the Left front. But what explains the four seats captured by Congress getting just 10% votes. That’s because these votes were gained in a concentrated belt of north central Bengal, and gave Congress an edge over others in that region. Elsewhere it was wiped out.
Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) may not have performed well considering that it was much hyped in the media and had put up over 400 candidates across the country. But its performance in two states, Delhi and Punjab, is creditable. In Delhi it got 33% votes, improving upon its vote share from last December’s state assembly elections when it had got about 28% votes. It lost out decisively to BJP this time round because BJP itself improved its vote share to over 46%, from 33% in December.
In Punjab, AAP got nearly 25% votes, and managed to get four members in the Lok Sabha. This, despite the fact, that the BJP-Akali alliance got about 35% votes and the resurgent Congress 33%. In this genuinely triangular contest, everybody walked away with a few seats.
Assam indicates a worrying polarization of votes on religious lines with BJP getting nearly 37% votes and the All India United Democratic Front (AIUDF), an outfit with support in the minority community, getting 15% votes. This led to a sweep by AIUDF in lower Assam and a sweep by BJP elsewhere.
The simplest contests were in the states where two parties like BJP and Congress slugged it out straight, as in Gujarat, MP, Chhattisgarh, and Rajasthan. With its dominant support and vote shares, BJP swept them, decimating Congress. In Maharashtra, too, it was a similar situation except that on both sides were alliances.
They got the votes, not the seats
Parties Like DMK In TN, Left In Bengal, BSP In UP Did Not Benefit From A Significant Vote Share
Subodh Varma | TIG
At the national level, the story of votes (not seats) obtained by various parties and alliances is fairly straightforward. BJP and its allies got about 38% votes, Congress and its allies got 23%, the four major regional outfits — SP, BSP, Trinamool and AIADMK — got about 14% votes together, and the Left got about 5%.
Move from this big picture to the state-level shares of votes, and an intricate mosaic emerges. It reveals the huge strength of nearly a dozen parties at the state level. Note that the two big parties, BJP and Congress, have got just about 50% votes nationally — the balance is distributed amongst parties with regional bases.
The vote shares show the great advantage of the right kind of alliances, and the burden of dead wood. For instance, BJP benefited from key alliances with Paswan’s Lok Janshakti Party (LJP) in Bihar and the Telugu Desam (TDP) in Andhra Pradesh, while Congress managed to stay afloat in Bihar due to its tie-up with Lalu Prasad’s Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD).
One of the biggest surprises of this election was that no candidate of the Mayawati-led Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP) won in Uttar Pradesh, which is BSP’s stronghold, though it managed a creditable 20% of votes. In the outgoing Lok Sabha, it had 21 members.
There are other states where a similar anomaly can be seen. In West Bengal, the Left got nearly 30% votes but had to be satisfied with just 2 seats. In Tamil Nadu, DMK and its small party allies garnered 27% votes and got no seats. In Odisha, Congress got 26% votes but no seat while the BJP got 22% and just one seat.
The reasons for these bizarre results lie partly in the electoral system and partly in the specific nature of vote distribution. In the ‘first past the post’ system the candidate getting the largest number of votes in any seat wins. So, in a multi-cornered contest, a candidate with say 20% votes may win a seat because each of the others have individually got less than that. One well-known solution to this problem is adopting a proportional representation system in which seats are allocated according to share of votes, a system practiced in many countries.
But there is another factor to be kept in mind: the wave. In most of these states where parties with lots of votes have gone with less (or no) seats, there is one party which is getting bulk of the votes. In Tamil Nadu and in Odisha, the winning party — AIADMK and Biju Janata Dal respectively — got an overwhelming 44% of votes. So, even if you get 25% votes you lose badly.
In West Bengal, Mamata’s Trinamool Congress got nearly 40% votes, outstripping its main challenger the Left front. But what explains the four seats captured by Congress getting just 10% votes. That’s because these votes were gained in a concentrated belt of north central Bengal, and gave Congress an edge over others in that region. Elsewhere it was wiped out.
Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) may not have performed well considering that it was much hyped in the media and had put up over 400 candidates across the country. But its performance in two states, Delhi and Punjab, is creditable. In Delhi it got 33% votes, improving upon its vote share from last December’s state assembly elections when it had got about 28% votes. It lost out decisively to BJP this time round because BJP itself improved its vote share to over 46%, from 33% in December.
In Punjab, AAP got nearly 25% votes, and managed to get four members in the Lok Sabha. This, despite the fact, that the BJP-Akali alliance got about 35% votes and the resurgent Congress 33%. In this genuinely triangular contest, everybody walked away with a few seats.
Assam indicates a worrying polarization of votes on religious lines with BJP getting nearly 37% votes and the All India United Democratic Front (AIUDF), an outfit with support in the minority community, getting 15% votes. This led to a sweep by AIUDF in lower Assam and a sweep by BJP elsewhere.
The simplest contests were in the states where two parties like BJP and Congress slugged it out straight, as in Gujarat, MP, Chhattisgarh, and Rajasthan. With its dominant support and vote shares, BJP swept them, decimating Congress. In Maharashtra, too, it was a similar situation except that on both sides were alliances.
It is Modi, not BJP that won this election
One in every four respondents who voted for NDA said they would not have voted for the coalition had Modi not been the prime ministerial candidate
How did the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) come to power in 2014? In this article, we show there was a clear mandate in favour of the BJP. The more important question is what led to such a massive support. In the second part of the article, we show that there was a large ‘Modi effect’ that propelled the BJP to victory. The party’s victory was also built on an unprecedented coalition of social groups, the upper castes, OBCs, and tribals with many Dalits supporting it as well. With this singular victory, the BJP has clearly replaced the Congress as the system-defining party. The BJP, not the Congress, is likely to become the focal point of electoral alignment and re-alignment in the coming elections.
The verdict in 2014 has clearly made the BJP a national party with significant presence in almost all parts of the country. The party virtually swept the polls in its traditional strongholds of northern, western and central India. More notably, it made significant advances in many parts of the country that were not the party’s traditional bastion. Without the support of any ally, the BJP won a large chunk of votes in Jammu and Kashmir (36.4 per cent), West Bengal (16.8 per cent), Assam (36.5 per cent), Manipur (11.9 per cent), Arunachal Pradesh (46.1 per cent), and Orissa (21.5 per cent). In Andhra Pradesh (Telangana and Seemandhra) and Tamil Nadu, the BJP has made important inroads with the help of alliance partners.
The BJP’s single-handed majority in the Lok Sabha is noteworthy for two reasons. First, no party has achieved this feat after 1984. Second, no party has received more than 30 per cent of the total votes after the 1991 Lok Sabha elections. Since the fragmentation of party system in the 1990s, even a small plurality of votes has been sufficient to obtain large majorities in the number of seats held by a party. For example, in the Uttar Pradesh assembly, the Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP) won a majority in 2007 with just 30 per cent vote share and the Samajwadi Party (SP) won a majority in 2012 with just 29 per cent of the votes.
A more careful look at the data shows the remarkable nature of the BJP’s victory. In the 2014 Lok Sabha elections, the BJP contested only 428 seats. The party won more than 50 per cent votes in 137 seats, and in another 132 seats it won more than 40 per cent votes. This is very unusual and unexpected given India’s recent electoral history. The data presented in table 1 indicates how big the BJP’s victory was. The average victory margin during the 2009 elections was 9.2 percentage points. In 2014, the average victory margin increased to 15 percentage points largely because many voters turned to the BJP. In many constituencies, the BJP-led NDA’s vote share was greater than the vote shares of the first and second runner-ups combined.
The BJP won more than 50 per cent of the total votes in States which have a two-party competition system (such as Himachal, Uttarakhand, Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan, Gujarat, and Chhattisgarh). In many States with multi-party competition, the BJP-led coalition was far ahead of its nearest rivals. For example, in Uttar Pradesh the BJP-Apna Dal coalition won more votes than the combined vote shares of the SP and the BSP. Similarly, the NDA coalition won more than 50 per cent of votes in Maharashtra. In Delhi, BJP’s vote share is only marginally lower than the combined vote share of the Congress and the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP). In Bihar, it would take the combined votes of the entire political spectrum the JD (U), the Congress, and the RJD, to get past the NDA’s vote share.
The aggregate election returns suggest quite clearly that the BJP won a mandate and this mandate cannot be attributed solely to the Congress voters shifting their vote to the BJP.
Who voted for BJP?
Why did voters gravitate to the BJP? There are two interrelated reasons for the electoral success of the BJP. The first, and the most commented upon reason is Narendra Modi. Survey data shows that most citizens preferred Mr. Modi as Prime Minister. Except in Kerala, Mr. Modi led his nearest rival Rahul Gandhi by a huge margin when voters were asked whom they preferred as Prime Minister. Mr. Modi was preferred by more citizens than those who wanted Rahul Gandhi, Sonia Gandhi, and Manmohan Singh as prime minister put together
We use a statistical model to assess the influence of various factors that led citizens to vote for the NDA. The result reported in Figure 1 is the difference in the probability of voting for the NDA between the most likely and least likely category of each variable (except the caste-community). To determine the influence of ‘the Modi factor’, respondents were asked whether they give importance to local candidates, State-level leadership, or the PM candidate while voting. The results reported in Figure 1 show that the probability of those who gave importance to the PM candidate while exercising their franchise are twice more likely to vote for the NDA compared to those who valued local or State-level leadership. Respondents were also asked if they would have voted any differently had Mr. Modi not been the prime ministerial candidate of the NDA. One in every four respondents who voted for the NDA said they would not have voted for the coalition had Mr. Modi not been the prime ministerial candidate. And the odds of this were higher in States like Assam, Bihar, Delhi, Haryana, Rajasthan, and Karnataka. It is Modi, not the BJP that won this election.
Social barriers fall
Second, the BJP appears to have broken social barriers just enough to make it victorious. So far the party has been associated with urban dwellers, upper castes, middle classes and the educated. As in the past, the BJP did win a larger percentage of votes and seats in predominantly urban constituencies. However, its success in semi-urban and rural constituencies is extraordinary.
In addition, the BJP not only held on to its social base but managed to attract a large number of voters from other communities. There was an unparalleled consolidation of upper castes and middle classes behind the BJP. A large number of non-traditional BJP voters such as Scheduled Tribes and the poor have voted for the party this time. Nationally, the BJP leads the Congress among both Adivasi and Dalit voters by a wide margin.
Furthermore, NES pre- poll data suggests that the high-level of dissatisfaction with the UPA government and the popularity of Mr. Modi drew new voters to the NDA. Thus, first-time voters, urban, educated, with high media exposure, upper caste, and economically well off were more likely to vote for the NDA. The biggest effect, however, remains associated with caste. It is the upper castes, the OBCs, and the tribals who together propelled the BJP to victory. This is an unprecedented alliance of social groups and is a winning coalition under any circumstances. The only parties who managed to stand up to the BJP wave in this election — the Trinamool Congress in West Bengal, the Biju Janta Dal in Odisha, and the AIADMK in Tamil Nadu — managed to retain a large chunk of the upper castes and OBC votes.
How did the BJP build this winning coalition? It is certainly not a vote for economic liberalisation. Figure 1 makes it clear there is little support among voters of the BJP for economic liberalisation. In our view the upper castes, OBCs, and tribals voted for the BJP in large numbers because of the policy failures of the UPA including the politics of handouts that seem to have run their course.
As the governing party, the BJP is likely to gravitate towards ideological centre. This is likely to add to the woes of regional parties and the Congress who compete for a share among the Dalits, Muslims, and upper OBCs (like Yadavs and Kurmis in north India, Vokkaligas in Karnataka, Nairs in Kerala, Maratha-Kunbi in Maharashtra). Due to the shrinkage in their voter base, these parties will find it hard to compete against the formidable social coalition that the BJP has stitched together.
The challenge for the BJP would be to make sure that it continues to expand geographically, give the party an identity separate from Mr. Modi, deliver on the promises closely tied to him and to keep its winning coalition together.
(Pradeep Chhibber and Rahul Verma are with Lokniti-CSDS, and the Travers Department of Political Science, University of California, Berkeley, U.S.)
Why minority vote consolidation did not happen
Even as Muslims rallied behind non-BJP options en bloc, they were overwhelmed by the Hindu upper caste and OBC consolidation
Amid the disaster that Lok Sabha election had for the Congress, there is perhaps a small consolation. While the party performed poorly among its traditional voters, namely Dalits and tribals, the grand old party continues to have the overall support of Muslims, India’s largest religious minority.
The National Election Study (NES) shows that the nationwide Muslim vote for the Congress was 38 per cent (excluding allies), the same as it was in 2009. The question, in fact, is why the Congress did not get more votes among the Muslims given the community’s aversion to the BJP.
NES data clearly shows that in States where the Congress is in direct competition with the BJP, it got nearly three-fourths of the Muslim vote overall. On the other hand, States in which there is a presence of strong regional parties (Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, Andhra Pradesh, Tamil Nadu, West Bengal, Delhi, Assam etc.) saw the overall Muslim support for Congress drop to about one-third, as the community also voted for the non-Congress options.
Interestingly, the BJP too saw its vote share among Muslims rise to about 8 per cent at the national level compared to the four per cent it had five years ago. While this undeniably indicates greater support for the BJP among Muslims, the increase in Hindu support, from 22 per cent in 2009 to 36 per cent in 2014, is proportionately greater.
While about two out of every five Muslims voted for the Congress in this election, upper-caste support for the BJP was one out of two. Even as the Muslims rallied behind non-BJP options, a counter Hindu upper caste and OBC consolidation — much greater in magnitude — seems to have rendered the Muslim votes ineffective, even in seats where Muslims have always been in a position to make a difference to the final outcome.
Of the 87 seats where Muslims are over 20 per cent of the population, the BJP won 42 as opposed to just 15 seats in 2009. That the voice of 15 per cent of the country’s population could be rendered ineffective expresses a paradox present in our democracy.
The leadership factor in the 2014 polls
The decisive victory of the BJP and the visible rout of the Congress in the elections are attributed by many to the leadership factor.
The decisive victory of the BJP and the visible rout of the Congress in the elections are attributed by many to the leadership factor. The BJP appeared to benefit by projecting a prime ministerial candidate much before the start of the election campaign and made every effort to make this election a choice between Narendra Modi and Rahul Gandhi.While the BJP’s victory was propelled by the campaign of its prime ministerial candidate, it was also greatly helped by the leadership crisis in the Congress party. The second term of the United Progressive Alliance government faced a huge credibility crisis. A Prime Minister announcing his retirement just prior to the start of the campaign did not help in boosting the image of the Congress party. In most parliamentary systems, if Prime Ministers plan to step down or retire, they announce their decision much before the elections to allow the new leader to consolidate his position. The leadership factor also appears to have played a vital role in halting the BJP’s march in West Bengal, Tamil Nadu and Odisha.
The rise of Modi
In the 2009 elections, only two per cent of the respondents referred to Narendra Modi when asked who they would like to see as their next Prime Minister. In 2013, soon after his declaration as the head of the campaign committee, the support rose to 19 per cent. After the BJP announced that he was theirprime ministerial nominee, over one-thirds of the respondents mentioned his name. It is also relevant to note that Mr. Modi has maintained a clear 20 percentage point advantage over Mr. Gandhi since 2013. Also, in 12 States where the BJP did exceptionally well, the support for Mr. Modi as Prime Minister was much higher than the national average.
The post-poll survey also asked if people would vote for the BJP even if Mr. Modi was not the prime ministerial candidate. Around one-fourth of those who voted for the BJP said they would have changed their vote in such a scenario. This was significantly higher in States where the party did well. The response to this question merits detailed scrutiny, especially among BJP supporters. In Karnataka, six of every 10 of those who voted for the BJP stated that if Mr. Modi was not the prime ministerial candidate, they would have changed their party choice. In Bihar and Rajasthan, four of every ten respondents took this stand. Even in States like Tamil Nadu and West Bengal where the BJP expanded its presence, a significant chunk of those who voted for the party took the same stand.
The post-poll survey asked a series of questions on who the respondent would pick as his/her leader if asked to choose from among the top leaders of political parties, keeping in mind critical leadership qualities. No choice of names was given; it was left to the respondents to name a leader. The leadership qualities included concern for people, trustworthiness, getting things done, taking other leaders along and experience. On all five indicators, four of every 10 respondents mentioned Mr. Modi’s name. Mr. Gandhi was behind on all indicators by more than 25 percentage points. Similarly, when a set of questions was raised on which leader was best suited to deal with issues such as national development, price rise, controlling corruption, national security, and the upliftment of Dalits, close to four of every 10 respondents mentioned Mr. Modi’s name.
It would be difficult to concede that this was a Presidential-style race as only one party announced its prime ministerial candidate. The BJP’s victory had much to do with a well-planned leader-driven campaign but it also had to do with an uninspiring and ineffective ruling coalition and leadership.
(Sandeep Shastri is Pro-vice-chancellor, Jain University, Bangalore.)
The road ahead for the Election Commission
The Election Commission’s submission of the list of elected MPs to the President on May 18 brought down the curtain on the general election to the 16th Lok Sabha. A vigorous campaign that began well with sparkling wit, barbs and repartee however deteriorated over time. From the announcement of elections till the last date of polls, the EC seized, among other miscellaneous items, Rs. 313 crore in cash, a staggering amount of liquor valued at Rs.1000 crore, 1.85 lakh kg of narcotics and more alarmingly, 145 kg of heroin. Andhra Pradesh emerged the undisputed leader in the amount of cash seized; Karnataka and Tamil Nadu topped the ranks in the cash-for-votes department. Sadly, if newspaper reports and party protestations are to be believed, booth capturing seems to have returned to the electoral arena after almost a decade. Further, the number of mistakes in electoral rolls and in the names of prominent citizens missing from them went up in these elections in many places such as Pune and Mumbai.
Campaign to attract voters
The unprecedented spike in voter turnout was a welcome surprise, making the EC justifiably proud of its systematic campaign to enthuse electors to exercise their franchise. But the announcement by the election machinery — of rewards for voting — made one wonder whether the EC was also veering toward the view that the average Indian voter has to be ‘lured’ to vote. While providing basic facilities in polling stations is unexceptionable, model polling stations at Rs. 60,000 a unit seemed a mockery of financial prudence. Was the EC bitten by the publicity bug to miss the plot somewhere in its high-profile Systematic Voters Education and Electoral Participation campaign?
From all accounts, it seems that there was no intensive revision of electoral rolls this time. If only a summary revision was done, the chances of the names of long-time voters getting deleted would have been low. Election Commissioner H.S. Brahma, while graciously apologising for the faux pas, attributed the problem to lapses in supervision. The Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) on his part promised an inquiry into the alleged large-scale disappearance of names in the Pune and Mumbai electoral rolls. It would be in the interests of the EC to have the summary revision done quickly and share the information with the public so that suspicions of intentional wrong-doing can be removed. But in finding a solution, we cannot overlook the fact that fast-paced urbanisation necessitates a paradigm shift in the maintainenance ofurban electoral rolls.
The Booth Level Officer (BLO) has been a useful intervention but in urban areas he can no longer cope with his task. A study prior to the 2008 election to the Karnataka Assembly revealed that in Bangalore, there was close to 10 per cent change every year in the electoral rolls due to inter-city and intra-city migration. If changes are not tracked regularly in the space of a couple of years, the dissonance will become pronounced. In urban centres, the BLOs, unlike their rural counterparts, may not be living in the same area and may not be intimately familiar with their respective charges.
It is time that a permanent set up is created in every ward in all metropolitan cities and in all municipal towns with more than 5 lakh people taking care of the changes in electoral rolls through the year. In the run up to the 2008 general elections to the Delhi Assembly, former Chief Minister Sheila Dikshit approved the setting up of 70 Voter Registration Electoral Photo Identity Card centres, one for each assembly constituency, covering two municipal wards. Such a facility could be part of a multiple service centre providing a number of services to citizens such as providing birth and death certificates, receiving tax payments, redressing grievances on deficient municipal services and so on. Further, it would be more cost-effective if the same rolls are used for municipal elections. It is also necessary that reputed NGOs are involved with government staff and are provided adequate monetary compensation.
Database of deleted names
The Chief Election Commissioner had said in a televised interview that there was “no substitute to diligent and sustained hard work and perseverance.” That has to be enforced at the ground level. A separate database of deleted names should be created for each polling station which should be preserved for five years, and names should be checked for repetition elsewhere.
In an effort to curb the use of money power in this election, the EC initiated a slew of measures. A new expenditure monitoring division was created. The material gathered by these teams has to be put to effective use. While election petitions have to be filed within 45 days of declaration of results, the candidate gets 30 days to file the statement of accounts, leaving only 15 days for an objector to prepare his case for submission before the competent court. While election petitions are filed only against winning candidates, others violating the expenditure ceiling go scot-free unless a case is filed before the EC or it takes up a case suo motu under Section 10A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951. The Supreme Court, in the case of the former Chief Minister of Maharashtra, Ashok Chavan, recently confirmed its 1999 decision that under Section 10A, the EC is empowered to disqualify a candidate who files an incorrect election expenditure statement. It would be better if expenditure statements and video recordings of the activities of the candidates are proactively shared by the EC with activists, enabling them to take up cases. A dent can be made in the blatant overspending by candidates only if the EC disqualifies some prominent candidates in extraordinary cases.
The EC has its task cut out and its time it concentrated on its primary tasks.
| Model Code of Conduct & its Evolution | ||
Free and fair elections form the bed rock of democracy. This envisages a level playing field for the contestants and an equal opportunity for all parties for presenting their policies and programmes to voters. In this context the Model Code of Conduct(MCC) gains relevance. The MCC intends to provide a level playing field for all political parties, keep the campaign fair and healthy, avoid clashes and conflicts between parties, and ensure peace and order. It aims to ensure that the ruling party, either at the Centre or in the states, does not misuse its official position to gain an unfair advantage in an election. This instrument is a major contribution of Indian electoral system to the cause of democracy.
The MCC is a set of norms for conduct and behavior on the part of the Parties and candidates, in particular. The uniqueness of the MCC is the fact that this was a document that originated and evolved with the consensus of the political parties. The origin of the MCC dates back to 1960 when the MCC started as a small set of Dos and Don’ts for the Assembly election in Kerala in 1960. The Code covered conducting of election meetings/processions, speeches, slogans, posters and placards (CEC-Shri K.V.K.Sundaram). In 1962 Lok Sabha General Elections, the Commission circulated this code to all the recognized political parties and the State Governments were requested to secure the acceptance of the Code by the Parties. (CEC-Shri K.V.K.Sundaram). Report received after the 1962 general election showed that the Code was followed by and large. In 1967, the Code was followed in the Lok Sabha and Assembly elections.(CEC-Shri K.V.K.Sundaram).
Evolution of the MCC and its implementation since 1967
· In 1968, the Election Commission held meetings with political parties at State level and circulated the Code of Conduct to observe minimum standard of behavior to ensure free and fair elections. (CEC-Shri S.P. Sen Verma)
· In 1971-72, during General Election to the House of the People/State Legislative Assemblies the Commission circulated the Code again. (CEC-Shri S.P. Sen Verma)
· At the time of general elections to some State Assemblies in 1974, the Commission issued the code of conduct to the political parties in those States.
The Commission also suggested constituting committees at district level headed by the District Collector and comprising representatives of political parties as members for considering cases of violation of the code and ensuring its compliance by all parties and candidates.
· For the 1977 Lok Sabha general election, the Code was again circulated to the political parties. (CEC-Shri T. Swaminathan).
· In 1979, Election Commission, in consultation with the political parties further amplified the code, adding a new Section placing restrictions on the “Party in power” so as to prevent cases of abuse of position of power to get undue advantage over other parties and candidates. (CEC-Shri S.L.Shakhdar)
· In 1991, the code was consolidated and re-issued in its present form. (CEC-Shri T.N.Seshan).
· The present code contains guidelines for general conduct of political parties and candidates (no attack on private life, no appeal to communal feelings, discipline and decorum in meetings, processions, guidelines for party in power – official machinery and facilities not to be used for electioneering, prohibition against Ministers and other authorities in announcing grants, new schemes etc).
· Ministers and those holding public offices are not allowed to combine official visits with electioneering tours.
· Issue of advertisements at the cost of public exchequer is prohibited.
· Grants, new schemes / projects cannot be announced. Even the schemes that may have been announced before the MCC came into force, but that has not actually taken off in terms of implementation on field are also required to be put on hold.
· It is through such restrictions that the advantage of being in power is blunted and the contestants get the opportunity to fight on more or less equal terms.
· MCC has got the judicial recognition of the highest court of land. The dispute over the date when the Model Code of Conduct should come into force -- the issuance of the press release by EC announcing the poll dates or the date of actual notification in this regard was resolved in the Union of India Vs. Harbans Sigh Jalal and Others [SLP (Civil) No.22724 of 1997)] decided on 26.04.2001. The apex court gave the ruling that the Code of Conduct would come into force the moment the Commission issues the press release, which precedes the notification by a good two weeks. This ruling lay at rest the controversy related to the dates of enforcement of MCC. Thus the MCC remains in force from the date of announcement of elections till the completion of elections.
Legal Status for Model Code: Views of the Election Commission
There is an opinion in certain quarters for providing legal status to MCC. The Election Commission has, however, taken a stand against granting of such status to MCC. According to the Commission bringing the MCC on the statute book will only be counter-productive. In our country, elections are conducted within a very limited time span according to a well laid down schedule. Normally, a general election in a State is completed in about 45 days, from the day of announcement of the election schedule by the Commission. Thus, the expedition and promptness in dealing with the cases of violation of the model code of conduct is of the essence. If no timely action is taken to curb the violations and against the violators of the model code during the limited period when the election process is on, the whole significance of the MCC would be lost and the violator would be able to reap the benefit of such violation. If the model code of conduct is converted into a law, this would mean that a complaint would lie to the police/Magistrate. The procedures involved in judicial proceedings being what they are, a decision on such complaints would most likely come only long after the election is completed.
MCC is not a Hindrance to Developmental activities
One often gets to hear the complaint that the MCC is coming in the way of developmental activities. However, even during the short period when MCC is in operation, the ongoing development activities are not stopped and are allowed to proceed unhindered, and only the new projects, etc. which have not taken off on the ground that have to be deferred till the completion of elections. If there is any work that cannot wait for any reason (relief work on account of any calamity, etc), the matter can be referred to the Commission for clearance.
It is apt to refer to the following passage from a very recent Judgment (dated 16.02.2012) of the Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench) in Writ Petition No. 1361 of 2012 (Dr. Nutan Thakur Vs. Election Commission of India):
‘It shall not be out of place to mention that after election, peoples’ representatives discharge their obligation almost for a period of five years. The elections are held at the fag end of their tenure unless the assembly or Parliament is suspended or dissolved earlier. While holding the office, it is always obligatory on the part of the peoples’ representative to discharge their obligation honestly and fairly to serve the nation. In case they failed to discharge their obligation during their entire term while in office or in opposition, then making statement as a measure of allurement or appeasement to the peoples after issuance of Election Notification, shall be nothing but an instance of unfair practice on their part.’
Expenditure Monitoring Mechanism
The Election Commission conducts the elections to the office of the President, Vice President, Parliament and the State Assemblies. As per Article 324 of the Constitution, the Commission is vested with the power of Superintendence, direction and control of elections.
It is a well-known fact that without money, multi-party democracy cannot function, however ‘Money Power’ involves certain risks like:
The Commission is seriously engaged in curbing the influence of money power in elections, during General elections to Assembly / Parliamentary constituencies. The Election Commission has formulated a robust mechanism for monitoring election expenditure, which was first implemented during General Election to Legislative Assembly of Bihar in 2010. This monitoring mechanism was subsequently implemented effectively and systematically from 2010 to 2013 in the Assembly/ Bye- Elections in the States of West Bengal, Assam, Kerala, Tamil Nadu, Puducherry, Uttar Pradesh, Punjab, Uttarakhand, Manipur, Goa, Andhra Pradesh, Jharkhand, Gujarat, Himachal Pradesh, Meghalaya, Nagaland, Tripura, Karnataka, Rajasthan, NCT of Delhi, Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh and Mizoram. These measures have resulted in huge cash interception / seizures during the Assembly elections totaling to approximately 215 crore rupees.
The following are the main features of the Election Expenditure Monitoring:
· Opening of a separate bank account by each contesting candidate for incurring all major election expenses through cheque / demand draft drawn on this bank account only.
· A complaint-monitoring cell in each district with 24X7 toll free number to receive complaint from the public.
· Flying Squads, Quick Response Teams, Static Surveillance Teams headed by Executive Magistrates are formed in each constituency to track illegal cash transaction or any distribution liquor or any items for bribing/ inducement of the voters and to attend to all complains of election expenditure.
· All airports in the State, major railway stations, hotels, farm houses, ‘hawala’ agents, financial brokers, cash couriers, pawn brokers and other suspicious agencies/persons engaged in movement of cash are to be kept under close surveillance by the Income Tax Department and necessary action to be taken as per the provisions of the Income Tax Act.
· Monitoring of suspicious cash withdrawal from any bank account during election process.
· Expenditure Observers are appointed for each district with senior officers from Income Tax Department, Customs & Central Excise Department and other finance & accounts services from outside the State to oversee the election expenditure by the candidates during election.
· Assistant Expenditure Observers are appointed for each constituency, to assist the Expenditure Observers.
· Shadow Observation Register is maintained in each constituency for each candidate to record major expenses observed during the election.
· Video Surveillance Team is constituted with camera persons and Government officials in each team to videograph major election campaign expenses.
· Accounting Team is constituted in each constituency to maintain Shadow Observation Register and the folder of evidence.
· Media Certification and Media Expenditure Monitoring Committee (MCMC) constituted to monitor both print and electronic media including cable network, social media etc. for election advertisement and suspected Paid News.
· Campaign for Ethical Voting and to create awareness among voters not to accept any inducement in exchange of votes.
Election Expenditure monitoring mechanism has been adopted to curb the misuse of money power during elections to ensure free and fair elections. The following strategies are adopted:
· Interpersonal communication is taken up through the State/ Government of India units- Income Tax Dept. to track illegal cash, Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI) and Narcotics Control Bureau (NCB) to track drugs, Enforcement Directorate to track foreign Exchange, Police Department and Excise Department of the respective States to check other crimes related to bribery, terror, theft, narcotics, illegal liquor etc. and the abuse of money power in elections involving the candidate, his agent or any political party.
· A strict vigil is maintained over the movement of cash etc. through airports/ airstrips/ Helipads and a standard operating procedure (SOP) has been developed and implemented by the Bureau of Civil Aviation in consultation with the Commission. While the CISF is involved to keeps strict vigil at the airports of the poll going States to stop illegal movement of cash / bullion involving the candidate, his agent or any political party.
· The Ministry of Civil Aviation has been directed to operate Air Intelligence Units (AIU’s) in all the airports of the respective poll going states till the date of completion of elections so as to keep track of and report of any illegal movement of cash involving the candidate, his agent or any political party.
· The Government of India unit like the Financial Intelligence Unit (FIU) has been requested to provide real time information on suspicious cash transactions in banks and to keep close watch on withdrawal of cash exceeding the specified limits from the Bank Accounts in poll going States.
· BSF and SSB has been requested to keep strict vigil over movement of illegal items, cash etc. through international borders of poll going States meant to influence voters.
· The cases of candidates, who have not filed correct election Expenditure statements, have been processed for disqualification under section 10A of the R.P. Act, 1951.
The above measures have gone a long way in curbing pernicious effect of money power during the general elections held in the last four years. There is still a lot of distance to be covered in this regard to eliminate the deep seated malady and the intelligentsia, media, civil society organizations should all join hands with Election Commission of India to create general awareness against the use of Money Power during elections.
|
Model Code of Conduct and the 2014 General Elections
Recently, the Election Commission has recommended postponing certain policy decisions of the government related to natural gas pricing, and notifying ecologically sensitive areas in the Western Ghats, by invoking the Model Code of Conduct (MCC). It has also censured severalcandidates for violating the MCC. In light of these recent events, we outline the key features of the MCC below.
What is the Model Code of Conduct and who does it apply to?
The MCC is a set of guidelines issued by the Election Commission to regulate political parties and candidates prior to elections, to ensure free and fair elections. This is in keeping with Article 324 of the Constitution, which gives the Election Commission the power to supervise elections to the Parliament and state legislatures.
The MCC is operational from the date that the election schedule is announced till the date that results are announced. Thus, for the general elections this year, the MCC came into force on March 5, 2014, when the election schedule was announced, and will operate till May 16, 2014, when the final results will be announced.
How has the Model Code of Conduct evolved over time?
According to the Press Information Bureau, a form of the MCC was first introduced in the state assembly elections in Kerala in 1960. It was a set of instructions to political parties regarding election meetings, speeches, slogans, etc.
In the 1962 general elections to the Lok Sabha, the MCC was circulated to recognised parties, and state governments sought feedback from the parties. The MCC was largely followed by all parties in the 1962 elections and continued to be followed in subsequent general elections.
In 1979, the Election Commission added a section to regulate the ‘party in power’ and prevent it from gaining an unfair advantage at the time of elections. In 2013, the Supreme Court directed the Election Commission to include guidelines regarding election manifestos, which it has included in the MCC for the 2014 general elections.
What are the key provisions of the Model Code of Conduct?
The MCC contains eight provisions dealing with general conduct, meetings, processions, polling day, polling booths, observers, party in power, and election manifestos. Major provisions of the MCC are outlined below.
- General Conduct: Criticism of political parties must be limited to their policies and programmes, past record and work. Activities such as: (a) using caste and communal feelings to secure votes, (b) criticising candidates on the basis of unverified reports, (c) bribing or intimidation of voters, and (d) organising demonstrations or picketing outside houses of persons to protest against their opinions, are prohibited.
- Meetings: Parties must inform the local police authorities of the venue and time of any meeting in time to enable the police to make adequate security arrangements.
- Processions: If two or more candidates plan processions along the same route, organisers must establish contact in advance to ensure that the processions do not clash. Carrying and burning effigies representing members of other political parties is not allowed.
- Polling day: All authorised party workers at polling booths should be given identity badges. These should not contain the party name, symbol or name of the candidate.
- Polling booths: Only voters, and those with a valid pass from the Election Commission, will be allowed to enter polling booths.
- Observers: The Election Commission will appoint observers to whom any candidates may report problems regarding the conduct of the election.
- Party in power: The MCC incorporated certain restrictions in 1979, regulating the conduct of the party in power. Ministers must not combine official visits with election work or use official machinery for the same. The party must avoid advertising at the cost of the public exchequer or using official mass media for publicity on achievements to improve chances of victory in the elections. Ministers and other authorities must not announce any financial grants, or promise any construction of roads, provision of drinking water, etc. Other parties must be allowed to use public spaces and rest houses and these must not be monopolised by the party in power.
- Election manifestos: Added in 2013, these guidelines prohibit parties from making promises that exert an undue influence on voters, and suggest that manifestos also indicate the means to achieve promises.
Is the Model Code of Conduct legally binding?
The MCC is not enforceable by law. However, certain provisions of the MCC may be enforced through invoking corresponding provisions in other statutes such as the Indian Penal Code, 1860, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, and Representation of the People Act, 1951.
The Election Commission has argued against making the MCC legally binding; stating that elections must be completed within a relatively short time (close to 45 days), and judicial proceedings typically take longer, therefore it is not feasible to make it enforceable by law.
On the other hand, in 2013, the Standing Committee on Personnel, Public Grievances, Law and Justice, recommended making the MCC legally binding. In a report on electoral reforms, the Standing Committee observed that most provisions of the MCC are already enforceable through corresponding provisions in other statutes, mentioned above. It recommended that the MCC be made a part of the Representation of the People Act, 1951.
No comments:
Post a Comment