Election-time is Parochialism-time in India - Major General Mrinal Suman PART 1

Election-time is parochialism-time in India. All politicians flourish by keeping the electorate embroiled in internal dissension based on region, religion, caste and language considerations. Overriding importance is assigned to the caste, creed, communal and regional factors. Most obnoxiously, caste-politics are played out unabashedly under the disingenuous taxonomy of ‘social engineering’.

 

Most newspapers carry articles highlighting caste-wise configuration of every constituency to make their predictions. Here is a reprehensibly appalling news item that appeared in a leading daily during the last Bihar elections, “In Arrah and Vaishali districts, saffron candidates seem to be drawing support from EBCs and Dalits. This can help them build upon the solid backing they are getting from upper caste Vaishyas, Paswans and Musahars.” Such reporting is symptomatic of the rot that afflicts the media.

 

The role played by the electronic media is far worse. Focus of every panel discussion is on the caste percentages and likely equations. It is sickening to hear anchors and panellists making divisive statements like – “All Yadavs will vote for Party A”; “Muslims will not vote for Party B”; “All Dalits are with Party C”; “Kurmis will vote for Party D”; “Brahmins will remain loyal to Party E”; “Mahadalits are with Party F”; “Banias continue to support Party G”; and so on. Pray who will vote as an Indian?

 

Opinion polls and surveys are also carried out on similar lines. The questions are loaded with parochialism – “Will the Muslims vote get divided” or “Are Mahadalits angry with Party X” or “Are Yadavs still with Party Y”? Thereafter, the findings are collated caste-wise, translated into vote-shares and analysed at length, thereby inciting partisan emotions. Reprehensible indeed! 

 

Unlike BBC and Doordarshan, most TV channels lack resources to have sufficient ground reporters to provide wider coverage across the nation and the world. For them, hosting panel discussions during prime-time is the most cost-effective, and perhaps the only option. Call a few aggressive spokespersons and initiate a free-for-all slanging match by throwing in an emotive and contentious issue. What can arouse passions more viciously than caste/religion/language? Every party plays the caste card shamelessly and yet has the temerity to paint others as communal.

In a mature democracy, the basis of electoral surveys should be economic progress, developmental matters, employment opportunities, educational facilities, health services and other welfare measures. What do the farmers, labourers and the office-goers feel? What are the aspirations of the youth? How to bridge the existing urban-rural divide? Sadly, all issues that impact the well-being of the nation are ignored; only caste and communal loyalties matter. 

                                                                                                    

 

If after 77 years of Independence, we are sinking deeper into the morass of parochialism, elections are the root cause of the malady. Media acts as a catalyst to spread the virus. Resultantly, the whole environment gets so vitiated that caste equations rule supreme with five highly devastating effects on the body-politic and unity of the country.

 

One, instead of making the voters rise above narrow parochial mind-sets, they are repeatedly reminded of their caste and exhorted to stay faithful to it.

 

Two, the electorate is brainwashed not to seek accountability from their caste leaders but follow them blindly; even though most of them have acquired enormous wealth and done little for their followers in the past. Worse, many have either been convicted or are under investigation for serious crimes.

 

Three, assured of continuous support of their caste-based vote-banks, most politicians have converted their parties into family enterprises. They thrive by appealing to the insular instincts of their factions.

 

Four, the stranglehold of caste-politics is so all-pervading that even the parties that want to break free are forced to look for winning candidates as per the caste mathematics of each constituency.

 

Finally, and most unfortunately, merit, competence and honesty of the candidates have ceased to be of any consideration. Only the caste matters. Some well-meaning citizens did try to fight elections to serve the nation, but tasted defeat at the hands of parochial leaders. Resultantly, the country is saddled with leaders of questionable character and quality.

 

The Current Dispensation

 

Under Art 324 of the Constitution, responsibility for the ‘superintendence, direction and control of elections’ is vested in the Election Commission. It is the guardian of free and fair elections. Whereas the Representation of the People Act, 1950 deals with the preparation and revision of electoral rolls, the Representation of the People Act, 1951 deals with all aspects of conduct of elections and post-election disputes. Various corrupt practices for which a candidate can invite disqualification have been enumerated in Section 123 of the 1951 Act.

 

According to Section 123(3) “appeal by a candidate or his agent or by any other person with the consent of a candidate or his election agent to vote or refrain from voting for any person on the ground of his religion, race, caste, community or language” is deemed to be corrupt practice. Additionally, “the promotion of, or attempt to promote, feelings of enmity or hatred between different classes of the citizens of India on grounds of religion, race, caste, community, or language”, has been made a corrupt practice by Section 123(3A).

 

Although the above provisions appear to be highly potent, they suffer from three major lacuna that impair their effectiveness considerably. First, they become applicable only when the election process is underway, thereby allowing devious candidates to spew venom to consolidate their parochial constituencies prior to the imposition of the Model Code of Conduct. Secondly, no preventive or punitive action can be taken by the Commission during the currency of the election process. Deviant candidates can be questioned only through election petitions after the declaration of results and by then the damage would have already been done. Thirdly and most surprisingly, there is no provision to challenge the corrupt practices of the candidates who lose the elections. 

 

However, under Chapter III (Electoral Offences), Section 125 categorically states electoral offences include – “Any person who in connection with an election under this Act promotes or attempts to promote on grounds of religion, race, caste, community or language, feelings of enmity or hatred, between different classes of the citizens of India shall be punishable, with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both.” Undoubtedly, it is a dissuasive provision but the legal process is far too long-drawn to be effective.

 As regards the conduct of the political parties, Section 29A of 1951 Act empowers the Commission to register associations and bodies as political parties. However, there is no constitutional or statutory provision that gives power to the Commission to de-register political parties on the grounds of violation of any provisions of constitution or any undertaking given to the Commission. Thus, many unscrupulous political parties get away with their parochial agenda.