dailyO
Politics

Why Najeeb Jung's autocracy is lethal for Kejriwal's AAP

Advertisement
Rajeev Dhavan
Rajeev DhavanMar 23, 2015 | 12:05

Why Najeeb Jung's autocracy is lethal for Kejriwal's AAP

It seems ironic that the original text of the Constitution did not mention political parties. Even so people voted not just for individuals but parties whose symbol was affixed in the ballot next to the candidate.

Political parties are mentioned for the first time in Anti-Defection Amendment, 1985, which not only recognised political parties, but sought to protect their legislative integrity to eschew floor crossing. By 1987, political parties were statutorily recognised for registration with the Election Commission under Section 29A of the Representation of People Act, 1951. In 2015, the Law Commission suggested that independent candidates be debarred. Mahatma Gandhi wanted the Congress disbanded after 1947. However, its denouement by 2017 remains to be seen. If the expectation was that local democracy panchayats and municipalities should be party-less it has been belied. Internally, political parties are democracy starved. Externally, they are the monolith vehicles of electoral democracy.

Advertisement

India has seen several kinds of political parties. The Congress, which claims to be sui generis, the split communists, episodic socialists, the fundamentalists (strong Hindu, weak Muslim) and the regional parties. Names change. Party sevaks include goondas. Since the 1980s and 1990s, two things have dominated Indian politics:

(i) Market economy versus the welfare state;

(ii) The rise of an aggressive, even vicious Hindu fundamentalism attacking India’s multi-cultural and religious soul.

A vote for secularism

Regional parties triumphed in the 1960s and 1980s, till now. At a national level, how does a new party come into being to be recognised by the cosmology of the Indian politics? Social activist Anna Hazare wanted party-less or all-party campaigns. Arvind Kejriwal has created a new party and triumphed over scepticism to win 67 out of the 70 Assembly seats in the Delhi election, an unparalleled triumph. Voter turnout was an all-time high averaging 67.14 per cent. Apart from the middle class young, the two significant shifts were: The AAP got the “minority” and “poor” vote. I told Kejriwal that this was a vote for secularism and socialism, which must be honoured in letter and spirit. The AAP represents the creation of a political party against impossible odds at a time when the Modi juggernaut supplanted democracy by charisma and the use of a crass and divisive RSS led-Sangh Parivar, with money and muscle power being thrown in for good measure.

Advertisement

Only time will tell whether the AAP is a episodic flare or the birth of a new politics. I believe the AAP represents new innovative politics — a fresh approach to the fatigued and fatiguing politics of our time. First, it promises a new form of electioneering and continuity of direct access to and by the electorate. This seeks to eliminate the accusation that India’s democracy moves from election to election. Not just Kejriwal but all ministers (and sub-ministers) and the 67 MLAs must maintain contact with the electorate at all times. Likewise, party MLAs and workers must constantly hold what English politicians call surgeries. The second aspect is to ensure that wild promises are not made; and those made are kept. The reason for this is that many feel that the AAP’s promises are overstated especially on the issue of "bijli, pani, sadak aur ghar". Imbricated in this is a federal issue. Delhi’s government has limited funds. What Kejriwal cannot do is use infrastructure funds for electricity! He needs to fight Delhi’s battles to get more funds for Delhi.

Third, the AAP needs transparency. Today, many public utilities have been privatised. The AAP has already asked the CAG to audit the discoms which resist external audit and have taken the matter to the Delhi High Court where the case is pending. The Reliance discoms are in the Supreme Court because they cannot pay suppliers and distributors of electricity. The public needs to know not just the government’s transparency but also those of the corporates who privately lord over Delhi. Fourth, the AAP has an internal Lokpal to ensure that complaints within and against the party are dealt with. This is mechanism needs to be strengthened.

Advertisement

The fifth issue is about inner-party democracy. We know that all other parties are top heavy. They don’t hold elections as former Chief Election Commissioner TN Seshan and now the Law Commission (in a clumsy proposal) want them to do. I was saddened to witness the implosion within the party in March whereby the Bhushans and Yogendra Yadav were accused of conspiring to make the AAP lose the election. Shanti Bhushan did criticise Kejriwal during the election which he should not have done. On March 4, Prashant Bhushan and Yadav were "booted" out of the party’s Political Affairs Committee. By March 18, they patched up. The AAP needs to avoid this kind of brinkmanship lest its credibility took a nose dive.

Tread cautiously

Sixth, the AAP needs to be warned of lieutenant governor Najeeb Jung. He is the Centre’s man in Delhi, and may even have political ambitions to become a BJP-sponsored vice-president of the country. Apart from issues of land and police, Article 239AA (4-6) and Section 41 of the National Capital of Delhi Act, 1991 mandates that in all other matters, Jung is bound by the chief minister’s advice. However, he is interfering with Kejriwal’s decisions, overlooking that he is an appointee of the Centre while Kejriwal is an elected chief minister. Jung’s autocracy must stop.

The AAP is a gift to India’s top-heavy democracy. Its Lokpal, Admiral Ramdas, is right in saying: The AAP must behave as a national party. The future is a challenge.

Last updated: March 23, 2015 | 12:05
IN THIS STORY
Please log in
I agree with DailyO's privacy policy