Has the functioning of the
Indian Parliament been able to foster democratic values and strengthen
participatory institutions down the line or has it been a failed
experiment?
These are the questions being asked as our
Westminster-modelled parliamentary democratic system celebrates its 60th
anniversary.
"From panchayats and nagar nigams to the
assemblies and the two houses of Parliament you only have rabble
rousers, playing to the galleries. One does no longer hear enlightened
debates interspersed with wit and sarcasm, as was the case till the 1977
Janata Party experiment," political commentator Paras Nath Choudhary
told IANS.
Former socialist leader from Lucknow Ram Kishore,
says: "The likes of Raj Narain, Madhu Limaye or even Piloo Mody, made
Parliament a vibrant democratic institution. The 'firing range'
comprising HV Kamath, Subramanian Swamy,
SN Mishra, Shibban Lal Saxena and Kunwar Lal Gupta was ever alert
during the 1970s to government lapses. Their questions and points of
orders were dreaded and ministers never made a mistake of coming to
Parliament without doing adequate home work."
During the 1960s
and 1970s, the performance of parliamentarians was generally of a high
order and the media relished the quotable quotes. As long as Ram Manohar Lohia
was in the house, one was assured of sparkling fire-works. Madhu
Limaye, Nath Pai, NG Gorey, Ashok Mehta and others carried the tradition
forward.
"In 1977 there were so many heavy weights, each an
institution in himself. Today's Parliament is no match. One finds
pathetic lack of ideological commitment today, especially among the
younger parliamentarians. They hardly go to the library and prepare
notes. There is a shocking qualitative degeneration in democratic
institutions at all levels," Ramji Lal Suman, former deputy minister in
Chandra Shekhar government.
Young politicians if groomed properly and infused with a degree of
ideological professionalism could still change the depressing scenario,
Suman added.
In sharp contrast to the composition of the two
houses in the 1960s or the 1970s, the present house is dominated by
amateurs who are better fighters than debaters. Many make public
speeches rather than try debating a point.
"If we have a
Parliament we must also have able parliamentarians who not only expose
the scams but also contribute to the policy making and enliven the
proceedings through literary quotes and witticisms. Giving speeches like
one was addressing a street corner gathering is easy, but to hit the
headlines in the next day's newspapers or making valuable contribution
to debates requires a lot of mid-night oil-burning and a professional
approach," says social activist Shravan Kumar Singh who worked with many
leaders in Bihar.
Indian Parliament is an important democratic
institution, for it combines both the legislative and executive
functions. By and large it has responded to changing public moods and
mass aspirations, say ruling Congress party leaders.
Former
Congress MLA Satish Chandra Gupta says, "I have nothing to feel cheerful
or happy about the general working of the institutions. The
intellectual level of politicians has generally gone down."
During the 1975-77 emergency when most of the opposition leaders were
detained, Parliament was reduced to a "walking corpse" - surviving more
in form than in vitality.
The Janata Party experiment could not
last long enough as there were too many heavy weights pulling the cart
in different directions.
"The Congress Young Turks, the egoistic three seniors Morarji Desai,
Choudhary Charan Singh, and Babu Jagjivan Ram, in addition to a whole
line up of Socialists including Madhu limaye, kept pulling one another
down and Raj Narain playing the joker added intriguing dimensions to the
survival of a government that was bedevilled by the dual membership
controversy that irked the BJP and the RSS," recalls senior ex-Janata
party leader Vinay Paliwal.
Clearly, the functioning of Parliament
in the past decade particularly has been affected by the quality of
people that have been elected. Many are believed to have criminal
background, if reports released by various pressure groups are to be
relied upon. Those who thought introduction of TV cameras to cover the
proceedings would usher in desirable changes in performance feel
cheated.
Veterans in Parliament have a duty to groom the
freshers. Old-timers say the MPs should spend more time in the house and
the library than in their individual constituencies. "The discretionary
funds for development available to MPs has been a huge distraction,"
says senior media person Rajiv Saxena.
No comments:
Post a Comment