When one reads Mr. Jaswant Singh’s recent reflections on the dismal state of Indian democracy, one cannot help but sympathize with the BJP’s now sidelined stalwart. While it is difficult to agree to all of his points of critique, no one will disagree with his larger point of frustration with the acute dysfunction that has lead to policy paralysis.
Indian democracy for all its fervor has always had seemingly daunting fault lines. Basic of them is the gulf between the population that elects public officials and one that finances the government. Indian elections typically see around 45%-50% voting, but highest participant rates are recorded in rural areas or areas with urban poor. The middle class has remained shockingly uninterested in queuing up to exercise the most treasured of our fundamental rights. A grotesque example of this indifference was provided by the residents of upscaleSouth Mumbai, who recorded a dismal voting percentage of 40% in Lok Sabha elections on 2009, only about a year after the same constituency suffered the horrific terror attacks of 26/11.
Contrast this by the same populations’ financial muscle and by extension their contribution in financing the government. Out ofIndia’s over 1.2 billion residents, only about 3% pay direct taxes*. And majority of this 3% of tax paying population are middle class or urban rich**, who live in the same urban areas that show low voter turnout during elections.
This utter disconnect is what causes an implicit tug of war between the mass population, whose priorities lie in welfare schemes and social spending, and not in constitutional reform or market friendly government policies. And the middle class, whose priorities are almost exactly the opposite. Successive governments have tried to juggle these competing priorities with achieving partial success, at best. And in an environment of having elections almost every year, it is not a surprise that we live in an environment of policy logjam.
One solution to this is to have effective national referendums. They are used in almost all major democracies as an effective way to take decisions on contentious issues. In theUSthey are used for everything from building a railway line to banning gay marriage. In most European countries they were used before joining the Euro, inBritainit was recently used to decide on important electoral reforms that had divided the coalition government.Australiais planning one to decide on their divisive issues of introduction of a carbon tax.
So with such a success in other democracies, one still finds reluctance for referendums inIndia. Argument is made that they will be very costly in a country with over a billion people. But while we do have over a billion people, we by no means have a billion voters. We have roughly 500-600 Million voters and usually the turnout is lower in referendums, as not all issues excite people as much as a general election. And with the introduction of UID, we will have the technological foundation to have an efficient and transparent referendum system.
While it is not a one stop solution to all of our political dysfunction, it will at least provide people a direct avenue to participate in the public policy process. And with any luck, we will be able to decide as a country, on serious issues such as Women’s reservation, Lokpal, Economic Reforms etc. in a more efficient way. Not to mention, that such a direct interaction with votes will promote a sense of ownership of the political process and stem the feeling of eternal disdain of the political class.
Ultimately, need of the hour is to think outside the box, promote such electoral innovation to arrest the downward spiral of policy logjam that has cast serious clouds over India’s once shiny growth story.
* Direct taxes represent roughly 56% of Government of India’s total tax revenue for year 2011-12
** As opposed to rural rich, who in most cases are farmers, hence live a blissfully tax free existence
Thought-provoking post. Sounds like implementing referendums can surely be one of the direct ways to engage people on an issue, and if planned and executed well, could potentially solve some of our country’s problems. But in terms of the execution itself what are your thoughts? I am not well read on this subject so have some basic questions.
Who initiates these referendums? Should they be initiated by citizens via petitions and mass movements (on the lines of Janlokpal) or through elected representatives who will be responsible for drafting and formalizing the said policies? It will be interesting to know what the norms and best practices are in other big democracies that have had success implementing them.
Thanks for the comment Atul.
So my cursory knowledge about referendums tells me that in most cases it is initiated by the government of the day. However there are exceptions:
- In some cases it is mandated by external entities, eg. the EU demanded such referendums on joining the Euro as a pre-requisite to joining the Euro for various soviet bloc countries. Also in case of Sudan, the UN mandated referendum was the reason how the new country of South Sudan was born. In other instances, it is negotiated as part of a political alliance. In case of Britain, the LibDems asked for a referendum before agreeing to support the Tories to form the present govt.
The only true and interesting exception is USofA! The “Proposition” process here fairly independent and can be initiated by anyone. So a focus group in California for example, put a proposition in 2008 to ban gay marriage. However, the catch is that it is not possible at the federal level and there is no provision for a federal proposition.
In this model, scope of frivolous petitions is huge, so typically the law mandates that any proposition must secure certain signatures (to be acquired at any private citizen/group’s own expense), let’s say 100,000 signatures, before it can go on the ballot. Which I think is a good “entry barrier” to prevent endless petitions reaching the ballot.
The USofA model is definitely interesting because the proposition process if applied effectively at even the local/state level in India could really have the potential to solve some basic, nagging problems at the grassroots level – and then perhaps gradually apply the same process at the national level. At least I would like to think of it that way. It’s easier said than done though, because I am not sure if each state will have that much of ‘autonomy’ when it comes to picking and choosing the referendums that serve their own purpose and then fighting for those in the Vidhan Sabha, even if we manage to get someone in power and let him/her be our ‘guiding light’ on these policies.
I am afraid that given the current state of affairs, all of this seems like a tall mountain to climb, and any sweeping changes will first require that the right people are in power, which of course seems to be the biggest hurdle right now. We seem to be caught up in sort of a chicken-and-egg scenario. On the one hand we need strong, dynamic leadership whom we can trust and have confidence in, and who will bring about some innovation and fresh ideas to the table. But at the same time, there is hardly any one out there who we can look up to (Mr. Narendra Modi is perhaps the only one?). I guess somewhere/somehow we, as urban middle class citizens, really need to pull up our socks before the next elections and try to evangelize these ideas.
Have you tried to submit your ideas to the BJP in writing? Or even directly to Mr. Modi via his website? You should definitely consider doing that.
Atul,
I have not submitted it to BJP in writing but, largely because at this stage it is just an idea, and needs to be developed into something more formal(a white paper, perhaps).
One of the main issues is, as you describe, whether to implement it at state level or central level. And implementing at local/state level makes sense as it could be a low risk way to test its effectiveness.
The only issue is, structurally, Indian states are way less powerful in deciding their business than American ones. For example, every law passed by a state assembly on topic such as law enforcement has to get presidential approval. Here, petty politics is played endlessly. A case in point, The Gujarat assembly has passed Guj COC Act thrice in last five years, it is modeled exactly on the Maharashtra COC Act (MaCOCA). But “sickularists” in Delhi have prevented our honorable President from giving her approval, on grounds that it is too harsh. While the Congress govt. in neighboring Maharashtra uses the exact same act to convict underworld and terrorists everyday.
So the point being, if state referendums will only have teeth, if this stupid business of central(or even state) approval is completely done away with.
We should work together to develop this idea further, once we have something presentable, putting it across to someone in the BJP shouldn’t be too big a hurdle.
Didn’t know about the approval process. That’s quite appalling…
Makes sense to formalize ideas like you said. We can definitely work on it.