12th Part
Q. Critically examine the nexus between bureaucrats, politicians &businessmen.
A. After India gained independence Democratic Socialist or Nehruvian model of the economy was adopted. It is the mixed economic model where Public sector Units were the basis while the Private sector also survived under the protective umbrella of the state. While key infrastructure sectors like road, electricity, ports, etc were under the public sector while government permission or license was required for every small and big thing necessary for setting up a business for the private sector. This had a cascading impact as -
1. License Raj - The license to do business was responsible for the increase in corruption as the discretionary power rested with the bureaucrat who could grant the license against favors granted by the concerned businessman. Alternately, the bureaucrat also had the power to withhold the permission on the concerned party’s refusal to please the government official. Very often, the bureaucrat and the political boss to whom he reported shared in the spoils, as the ultimate sanctioning authority was the politician. This was the genesis of the notorious ‘Licence-Permit-Quota Raj’ which in about 20-30 years from independence completely derailed India’s socialist pattern of development. The planning process, the mixed economy, all got off track because of the immensely powerful and corrupt troika of the officer-politician-businessman often contemptuously described as the “Babu-Neta-Bania’ syndrome. The corruption among the nexus was responsible for the exploitation of natural resources, an increase in the divide between the rich and the poor, nepotism and many other social ills besides ruining the economy.
2. Corruption and Rich-Poor Divide - The nexus resulted in an increase in corruption in all government departments as accountability towards people was absent. There was an increase in nepotism. Due to the policies adopted there was the accumulation of power and money in the hands of few. This resulted in the growth of a divide between rich who had the resources to pay and influence decisions and the poor who were at the mercy of the system. This led to widespread poverty as a large section of the population was illiterate and oblivious of their rights. The system slowly became completely ineffective and inefficient. The welfare policies initiated by the government failed to reach the people and they could not benefit as the money allocated is swindled by corrupt officials. Due to corruption the infrastructure created was also of poor quality thus Indian economy faltered.
3. The politicization of Bureaucracy - Due to the sharing of money accumulated through corruption the ministers and bureaucrats in India enjoyed a highly mutually beneficial relationship based on a quid pro quo basis. This relationship was based on mutual exchange of favors between the two. The net result of all this has been a highly politicized bureaucracy. The officers who did not participate in corrupt practices faced many hardships like transfer or demotion. This further made the system inefficient and ineffective as political loyalty and political patronage became a necessity. Plum postings were offered to those bureaucrats who toe the line of their political bosses, while those who insisted on following an independent line based on professional opinion were punished. The punishment took the form of arbitrary transfers, postings to insignificant departments and in some cases, even suspension from service. A system of rewards and punishments got institutionalized in due course of time with civil servants being rewarded and punished on the basis of their loyalty and commitment to politicians or parties and not on the basis of their professional performance. Over a period of time, the resultant politician-bureaucrat nexus grew into a powerful force immensely benefiting both the parties, but spelling a blow to the concept of development and citizen-friendly administration.
Thus the politician-bureaucrat-businessman combine led to corruption, nepotism, stagnant economic growth, lack of accountability and thus increased poverty. The license raj was instrumental in increasing corruption in the bureaucracy.
Q. Discuss the characteristics of the Dalit movement in India during the 1970s-1980s.
A. This period between 1970-1980 is the second stage of the Dalit movement in post-independent India. The reasons for the rise of the Dalit movement during the 1970s and 1980s include the rise of a new generation of Dalits which were more articulate and conscious of their rights, explosion of mass media and impact of the ideas and life of Dr. B R Ambedkar.
This phase was marked by the combination of class and caste struggles. In the rural areas of West Bengal, Bihar and Andhra Pradesh the naxalite movement launched a struggle against the caste and class exploitation. In the cities of Bombay and Pune, the Dalit Panther launched a similar kind of movement.
Dalit Panther Movement
An educated group of dalits who were writers and poets set up an organization in two major cities of Maharashtra known as Dalit Panther in 1972. These dalits were Influenced by Amedkarism, Marxism and Negro literature and they aimed at rejecting the caste system which according to them was based on the Brahmincal Hinduism. Spreading their ideas through the media and communication network, through the discussions and debate in the public space, i.e., offices, houses, tea shops, public libraries, Dalit writes, and poets provided the critique of the Hindu caste system and exploitative economic system. The activists of Dalit Panther belonged to the first generation educated youth, whose parents were poor peasants and laborers, who had inherited the legacy of Ambedkar movement.
Initially, the movement proclaimed to have an alliance of exploited people like Dalits, backward classes, workers and peasants. Its program centered around the problems of women, rejection of Brahaminical principles of purity and pollution, and fight against all kinds of political and economic exploitation. In the tradition of Ambedakarism, they aimed at achieving political power. This movement grows in the wake of the failure of the Republican Movement of the 1970s which suffered because of the personality differences of its leadership. The Dalit Panther could not make an alliance of all exploited continue for long. It got divided between the Ambedkarites and Marxists.
Naxalite Movement - It was only in the late 1960s that dalits of central Bihar were initiated into the political movement. But it was not the exclusively on the caste lines rather it was on the mix of caste and class exploitation. In Bihar, there seemed to one to one relationship between caste and class to a considerable extent. The landlords formed their caste senas (private armies) in order to protect their class interests. The Dalits got organized there on the caste and class lines. Dalit mobilization in Bihar got momentum again in the 1980s following the spade of attacks by the private army of the landlords such as Bhoomi Sena (of the Kurmis) or Lorik Sena ( of the Rajputs) on dalits. In reaction to this, the laborers formed Lal Sena to violently attack the gangs of landlords. By 1985 a section of this naxalite group formed a public front called The Indian Peoples Front (IPF) and contested elections. This showed a change in the perspective of the Naxalite groups which changed from an emphasis on the agrarian revolution to taking state power.
Dalit movement in Karnataka
In Karnataka also dalits organized into the Dalit Sanghasrsh Samiti (DSS). It was an organization that was set up in 1973 and set up its units in most districts of Karnataka. Like Bihar, it also took up caste and class issues and attempted to build an alliance of diverse groups of the exploited classes. It also brought dalits of different persuasions – Marxism, socialism, Ambedkarism, etc, under the banner of a single organization. During 1974 and 1784 it took up the issues relating to wages of the agricultural laborers, devdasi and reservation. It held study groups to discuss the problems of dalits.
Q. Discuss the major differences between the Fundamental Rights and the Directive Principles of State Policy.
A. Fundamental Rights - are described as the basic rights guaranteed to every citizen of the country under the constitution that helps in the proper and balanced development of personality. These are written in Part III of the Constitution which ensures civil liberty to all the citizens so that they can lead their lives peacefully. Moreover, they also prevent the State from intruding on their freedom. Fundamental Rights apply to all the citizens of the country equally, regardless of their race, caste, creed, sex, place of birth, religion, etc. Violation of the fundamental rights may lead to punishment under the Indian Penal Code (IPC) based on the discretion of the judiciary. At present, the Indian Constitution recognizes seven fundamental rights, they are:
# Right to Equality
# Right to freedom
# Right to freedom of religion
# Right against exploitation
# Cultural and Educational Rights
# Right to constitutional remedies
# Right to privacy
Directive Principles Of State Policy - Directive Principles of State Policy are the instructions given to the central and state government of the country so as to refer them while formulating the laws and policies and to ensure a just society. The principles are embodied in Part IV and listed in article 36 to 51 of the constitution. Directive Principles are cannot be enforced in the court of law. However, these are recognized as important in the governance of the State. These principles aim at creating such a socio-economic environment that can help the citizens to live a good life. Further, the directive principles also gauge the performance of government, concerning the objectives achieved by it.
Some other differences
# Fundamental rights are negative in nature in the sense that it prevents the government from doing certain things. In contrast, Directive Principles are positive, as it requires the government to do certain things.
# While fundamental rights establish political democracy, directive principles set social and economic democracy.
# Fundamental Rights are legal sanctions. They do not require any legislation for their implementation rather they are automatically enforced. But directive principles are moral and political sanctions and hence they require legislation for their implementation.
# Fundamental Rights promote the welfare of the individual. Hence they are personal and individualistic. On the contrary, Directive Principles promote the welfare of the community as a whole.
# The courts are bound to declare a law violative of any of the fundamental rights as unconstitutional and invalid. But the court can not declare a law violative of any of the directive principles as unconstitutional and invalid.
Q. Explain the special provisions for Jammu and Kashmir in the Constitution of India.
A. The whole state of Jammu and Kashmir enjoys a special status among the states in India under Article 370 of the Constitution. This state enjoys a special position because of the special circumstances under which it was brought under the governance of the Union of India. Special provisions were devised for the governance of the state of Jammu and Kashmir. These were incorporated in Article 370 of the Constitution. According to the provisions of this article, the state of Jammu and Kashmir was given a separate Constituent Assembly. It consisted of the representatives of people of the state. The aim of the Constituent Assembly was to write the constitution of the state and demarcate the jurisdiction of the Union of India over the state of Jammu and Kashmir.
The provisions of the Constituent Assembly were applied as interim arrangements. No law passed by the Parliament regarding the state of Jammu and Kashmir can be applied to the state without the Order of President of India in concurrence of the state government. No such conditions exist in the case of other states. In the original Constitution of Jammu and Kashmir, the provisions of Article 370 were described as temporary measures. Some of the important provisions of the Constitution of Jammu and Kashmir can be summarized as follows :
i) The territory of Jammu and Kashmir consists of all those areas which were under the sovereignty of erstwhile ruler. These areas include that territory which is at present under the occupation of Pakistan.
ii) Out of 123 assembly seats of Jammu and Kashmir, 25 seats are allotted to the Pakistan occupied portion of Kashmir that remain vacant because the situation is unsuitable for the election there.
iii) Though the executive and legislative powers of the State government cover the entire state, yet these powers do not apply to those areas which come under the jurisdiction of Parliament;
iv) The permanent residents" of Jammu and Kashmir enjoy all rights which are guaranteed in the Constitution of the Country.
v) A majority of not less than two-thirds of the members of the house can amend the Constitution by passing a bill. But the bill can not make the changes in provisions relating to the relationship between the state and the Union.
Q. Discuss the role of caste in Indian politics.
A. The numerical strength of a group is important in a democratic polity. All the Jatis or castes do not have equal numerical strength and spread in a geographical region like the village, the cluster of villages, taluka or district. A few are very large, some are small and some are minuscule. Some are concentrated in a village taluka and some are scattered in four to five households in a village. Numerically large Jatis have an edge over others in political bargaining with the government and political parties. Castes confined to endogamous character alone cannot muster a very large number at district levels and beyond for political activities. Some of the leaders of such Jatis form caste associations called Sabha or Sangam consisting of a cluster of Jatis having similar social ranking in a region. A few caste associations also consist of multi -castes having different social rankings in the traditional order. They may be called caste federation. Similarly, several castes join together and launch political movements. Non-Brahmin movements in Tamilnadu and Maharashtra are examples of such combined efforts of different castes coming together.
Political parties accommodate certain castes in distributing party tickets. While nominating candidates parties take into consideration caste of the aspirant candidate and numerical strength of different castes in a constituency. Caste leaders also mobilized their followers on caste lines so that they could show their strength. The role of caste in elections has two dimensions. One is of the parties and candidates and the second is of the voters. The former seeks the support of the voters projecting themselves as champions of particular social and economic interests, the latter while exercising their vote in favor of one party or candidate keep caste consideration in mind. Caste has provided an institutional mechanism to the poor and traditionally deprived groups for political participation.
Caste has been politicized to pursue economic and social rather than ritual concerns of the members. In that sense, it is a democratic incarnation of caste. But this process has reached an impasse and caught into a vicious circle. Political leaders use caste consciousness for mobilization but do not pursue vigorously, economic and social problems that the majority members of the caste face. The caste framework has its own limitations and It is divisive and hierarchical.
Q. Examine the notion of judicial review in India.
A. The notion of judicial review means the revision of the decree or sentence of an inferior court by a superior court. Judicial review has a more technical significance in pubic law, particularly in countries having a written constitution, founded on the concept of limited government. Judicial review, in this case, means that Courts of law have the power of testing the validity of legislative as well as other governmental action with reference to the provisions of the constitution. The Supreme Court’s power of judicial review extends to constitutional amendments as well as to other actions of the legislatures, the executive and the other governmental agencies. However, judicial review has been particularly significant and contentious in regard to constitutional amendments. Under Article 368, constitutional amendments could be made by the Parliament. But Article 13 provides that the state shall not make any law which takes away or abridges fundamental rights and that any law made in contravention with this rule shall be void. According to SC, the constitutional amendment is law but if that amendment violated any of the fundamental rights, it can be declared unconstitutional.
In 1967, SC observed that all former amendments that violated the fundamental rights to property were found to be unconstitutional. When a law remains in force for a long time, it establishes itself and is observed by the society. If all past amendments are declared invalid, the number of transactions that took place in pursuance of those amendments become unsettled. This will lead to chaos in the economic and political system. In order to avoid this situation and for the purpose of maintaining the transactions in fact, the past amendments were held valid. The Supreme Court clarified that no future transactions or amendments contrary to fundamental rights shall be valid. This technique of treating old transactions valid and future ones invalid is called prospective over-ruling. The Court also held that Article 368 with amendments does not contain the power to amend the constitution, but only prescribes the procedure to amend.
In 1973 the Supreme Court ruled that while the parliament could amend even the fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution, it was not competent to alter the basic structure or framework of the constitution. Under the newly evolved doctrine of the basic structure, a constitutional amendment is valid only when it does not affect the basic structure of the constitution. One of the limits on judicial review has been the principle of locus standi. This means that only a person aggrieved by administrative action or by an unjust provision of law shall have the right to move the court for redressal.
Q) Constituent Assembly - The Constituent Assembly, consisting of indirectly elected representatives, was established to draft a constitution for India. The Assembly was not elected on the basis of universal adult suffrage, and Muslims and Sikhs received special representation as minorities. The total membership of the Constituent Assembly was 389 of which 292 were representatives of the states, 93 represented the princely states and four were from the chief commissioner provinces. The Constituent Assembly (elected for an undivided India) met for the first time on 9 December 1946, reassembling on 14 August 1947 as a sovereign body and successor to the British parliament's authority in India and its last session was held on 24 January 1950.
Q) Meaning of Liberalization - Liberalization primarily means the removal of controls and regulations at various levels of the economy facilitating market forces to determine its course and direction. Liberalization means rule of law, political rights, accountability of power, periodic elections, a multi-party system, and an impartial judiciary. These conditions are seen as holding public authority transparent and under scrutiny. liberalization proclaims freedom of trade and investment; creation of free trade areas; elimination of government controls on the allocation of resources in the domestic economy; progressive removal of restrictions on external trade and payments; expansion of foreign investment, loans and aid and rapid technological progress. Liberalization also advocates a balanced budget; reduction in progressive taxation, social security and welfare and a diminished role for the state in economic management. It does not favor subsidies and state protection and resource allocations through administrative means. It suggests that inefficiency, corruption, and mismanagement are built into regimes with excessive state control.
No comments:
Post a Comment