Why we must support Anna Hazare
Why we must support Anna Hazare.
Perhaps after Loknayak Jayaprakash Narayan's call for Complete Revolution … Anna's fast may be the most significant mass movement in modern India yet.
Look at the way the Govt. has mishandled a popular movement. In the beginning, it completely mis-read the amount of support Anna’s agitation could generate.
Fresh from crushing Baba Ramdev’s fast unto death, the Govt. advisors chose to be complacent to the extent of taking things for granted. From August 15, with every single passing day, the ruling polity has come out looking increasingly petty, cussed and vindictive, targeting Anna with every gun that it has at its disposal.
It has accused Anna Hazare and his Trust as being "seeped in corruption". It questioned the funding of Anna's website. It tried digging up his ancient army records in the hope of finding something – anything – to chuck at him, hoping something may stick.
It borrowed on the weak spine of the Delhi Police to deny him a place to fast, placing uncalled for and unconstitutional limits of time and the size of crowd.
In a democracy of a billion people, it is understandable to have a billion different views on the issue of the Lokpal Bill versus Jan-Lokpal Bill. It is understandable if some think PM should be kept out of the ambit of Lokpal. It is understandable if some think civil society (read Anna Hazare) should be more practical and more patient or yielding in their demand or protest. It may also be understandable if some think that Anna Hazare's Satyagraha cannot be compared to Gandhiji’s Satyagraha, or even Anna himself is in no way comparable with the suave Mahatma.
It is understandable if some question the somewhat aggressive and rustic language deployed by Anna Hazare in his communication with our ‘Man Maun’ Prime Minister. It is also understandable if a section of the society is apprehensive about the so-called liberties Civil Society seems to be taking with our constitutional mechanism.
For that matter, it is also understandable if some think Anna Hazare to be a greater danger to our Constitution for seeking "extra-constitutional" remedies to cure our sick society of utter and rampant corruption.
My old friend Rajeev is "entirely against corruption, but disagreed with Anna Hazare's methods", even if he did not have an alternative to suggest. In his view, one couldn't be led into a “My way or Highway” sort of behavior that Team Anna is resorting to.
We can understand all these various views in a democracy.
But as we understand all of the above, we must also understand the low-stoop of the senior Congress functionaries in the personal mud-slinging against Anna -- the last-ditch defense of a political class running scared. And please get it right. Don’t believe for a moment as if it is only the Congress politicians who are running scared. The reality is that the entire UPA politicos, have not conducted themselves much better on the ground and in the parliament.
Even the Opposition too is only paying opportunistic lip service to Anna. So it may be equally naïve to believe that a Jana-Lokpal Bill blessed by Anna, shall sail smoothly through the Parliament, as a simple Anna seems to do. But then, Anna does seem to believe that at least in that case the country will know which parties support or do not support the people's bill, the knowledge of which could decide the fate of the parties at the next elections.
Frankly, the participation of "Civil Society" in a parliamentary process is impossible in the standard constitutional process in our democracy. The constitutional process provides only for the Legislature, the Executive, and the Judiciary; it does not provide for an un-elected Civil Society to play a role.
But this is because the constitutional processes are normally expected to work.
In an ideal constitutional set up, all citizens are equal before law, ministers and government servants are accountable to people, parliament functions and passes laws to govern the country rather than being in a perennial state of adjournment for one reason or the other, nor does it take over four decades to pass a law against corruption, justice is available to all and speedily, and 60% of the population does not remain bereft of food, education, health and justice due to large-scale corruption six decades after independence
These are the reasons why the call of Anna Hazare has stirred the nation's conscience. Never mind whether public support for Anna is 50%, 85%, 95% or 100%.
And even if Anna is in a minority, it stands to reason that after our constitutional processes - the legislature, executive, and the judiciary have failed us in all these decades, bringing in the "Civil Society" is unlikely to do any more damage to it.
Anna Hazare’s movement and the massive upsurge of support by the people of the country is an opportunity which all the constitutional mechanism and its political 'leadership' did not give it since independence.
Hence, if we are smart as a people, we shall seize the opportunity and lend our shoulders in whatever little way we can to him – not for his sake, but for our own. But if we are not smart, we can continue to debate and dissect the issue and do arm chair criticism, while the moment passes us by. The choice is yours.
Perhaps after Loknayak Jayaprakash Narayan's call for Complete Revolution … Anna's fast may be the most significant mass movement in modern India yet.
Look at the way the Govt. has mishandled a popular movement. In the beginning, it completely mis-read the amount of support Anna’s agitation could generate.
Fresh from crushing Baba Ramdev’s fast unto death, the Govt. advisors chose to be complacent to the extent of taking things for granted. From August 15, with every single passing day, the ruling polity has come out looking increasingly petty, cussed and vindictive, targeting Anna with every gun that it has at its disposal.
It has accused Anna Hazare and his Trust as being "seeped in corruption". It questioned the funding of Anna's website. It tried digging up his ancient army records in the hope of finding something – anything – to chuck at him, hoping something may stick.
It borrowed on the weak spine of the Delhi Police to deny him a place to fast, placing uncalled for and unconstitutional limits of time and the size of crowd.
In a democracy of a billion people, it is understandable to have a billion different views on the issue of the Lokpal Bill versus Jan-Lokpal Bill. It is understandable if some think PM should be kept out of the ambit of Lokpal. It is understandable if some think civil society (read Anna Hazare) should be more practical and more patient or yielding in their demand or protest. It may also be understandable if some think that Anna Hazare's Satyagraha cannot be compared to Gandhiji’s Satyagraha, or even Anna himself is in no way comparable with the suave Mahatma.
It is understandable if some question the somewhat aggressive and rustic language deployed by Anna Hazare in his communication with our ‘Man Maun’ Prime Minister. It is also understandable if a section of the society is apprehensive about the so-called liberties Civil Society seems to be taking with our constitutional mechanism.
For that matter, it is also understandable if some think Anna Hazare to be a greater danger to our Constitution for seeking "extra-constitutional" remedies to cure our sick society of utter and rampant corruption.
My old friend Rajeev is "entirely against corruption, but disagreed with Anna Hazare's methods", even if he did not have an alternative to suggest. In his view, one couldn't be led into a “My way or Highway” sort of behavior that Team Anna is resorting to.
We can understand all these various views in a democracy.
But as we understand all of the above, we must also understand the low-stoop of the senior Congress functionaries in the personal mud-slinging against Anna -- the last-ditch defense of a political class running scared. And please get it right. Don’t believe for a moment as if it is only the Congress politicians who are running scared. The reality is that the entire UPA politicos, have not conducted themselves much better on the ground and in the parliament.
Even the Opposition too is only paying opportunistic lip service to Anna. So it may be equally naïve to believe that a Jana-Lokpal Bill blessed by Anna, shall sail smoothly through the Parliament, as a simple Anna seems to do. But then, Anna does seem to believe that at least in that case the country will know which parties support or do not support the people's bill, the knowledge of which could decide the fate of the parties at the next elections.
Frankly, the participation of "Civil Society" in a parliamentary process is impossible in the standard constitutional process in our democracy. The constitutional process provides only for the Legislature, the Executive, and the Judiciary; it does not provide for an un-elected Civil Society to play a role.
But this is because the constitutional processes are normally expected to work.
In an ideal constitutional set up, all citizens are equal before law, ministers and government servants are accountable to people, parliament functions and passes laws to govern the country rather than being in a perennial state of adjournment for one reason or the other, nor does it take over four decades to pass a law against corruption, justice is available to all and speedily, and 60% of the population does not remain bereft of food, education, health and justice due to large-scale corruption six decades after independence
These are the reasons why the call of Anna Hazare has stirred the nation's conscience. Never mind whether public support for Anna is 50%, 85%, 95% or 100%.
And even if Anna is in a minority, it stands to reason that after our constitutional processes - the legislature, executive, and the judiciary have failed us in all these decades, bringing in the "Civil Society" is unlikely to do any more damage to it.
Anna Hazare’s movement and the massive upsurge of support by the people of the country is an opportunity which all the constitutional mechanism and its political 'leadership' did not give it since independence.
Hence, if we are smart as a people, we shall seize the opportunity and lend our shoulders in whatever little way we can to him – not for his sake, but for our own. But if we are not smart, we can continue to debate and dissect the issue and do arm chair criticism, while the moment passes us by. The choice is yours.
Comments
Post a Comment