:: P.C. Alexander

Jharkhand trapeze calls for poll reforms

Dr P.C. Alexander

Jharkhand is again in the throes of ministry-making. After the first elections to the newly-formed Jharkhand Assembly in February 2005, this is the fifth time that a ministry is being pulled down and a new one is being installed. An amusing feature of Jharkhand ministries is that there have always been about half-a-dozen aspirants for the chief minister’s chair and the person who loses one round believes that there will always be another chance for him. And then there is the permanent candidate for the chief minister’s post, Shibu Soren, who will not wait too long for his chance and has the ingenuity to manoeuvre events to his advantage. When politicians have no loyalties to any ideology or political party, membership of parties becomes a matter of convenience to secure power, and hopping from one party to another does not carry with it any criticism or shame. Independents and MLAs of single or two-member parties are at an advantage — in bargaining for better portfolios and shifting loyalties to new chief ministers. One independent MLA in Jharkhand had managed to secure the home portfolio for himself.

An analysis of the reasons why many leaders have been indulging in political trapeze of the type we see in Jharkhand will show that low-level of political morality in the country and growing permissiveness in our society for such "feats" by politicians are largely responsible for it. Some inherent deficiencies in our democratic system, particularly in the election process and the rules and conventions of ministry-making, have also facilitated many undemocratic and unethical practices.

Take the recent developments in Jharkhand. Nobody will consider Madhu Koda a great choice for chief minister based on his record of political morality and ethics. But what is shocking is that his substitute, approved by the UPA, was considered unfit to continue as Cabinet minister. Does this, therefore, mean that the moral issues raised against Soren’s return to the Central Cabinet do not apply to the Jharkhand Cabinet? The Congress spokesman has come up with the familiar defence for such untenable decisions by the party: it is being done to keep the "communal forces" (political nickname for BJP) from coming to power. This seems to have become an accepted argument for some political parties to defend themselves against criticism about their political stand on the confidence vote on 22 July. The Samajwadi Party suddenly decided that it was necessary for it to support the Congress to keep "communal forces" away from power! Most ironic was the Muslim League. It had no compunction in declaring that it was supporting the Congress in the confidence vote to keep "the communal forces" from coming to power. Political morality seems to be acquiring new definitions in our country!

Till now, governments in Jharkhand were formed or overthrown by the machinations of state-level politicians eager to grab power for themselves. Now, a change of government has been brought about because of the Central government’s compulsions — to keep its promise to an ambitious politician given when a crisis was threatening its survival. Political morality has no place in these sordid transactions. But those believing in democracy know that democracy without ethics and morality will not only weaken it, but also expose it to derision and eventual decline.

I have stated earlier in this article that some inherent deficiencies in our democratic system have contributed substantially to its distortion and deteriorating quality. Our present electoral system, tried for six decades, has been found to be defective in several respects and many commissions and experts have suggested remedial measures. One significant deficiency is the "First-Past-the-Post" (FPTP) system in single-member constituencies. It has been proved time and again that in a country like ours, with multiplicity of parties and independent candidates contesting elections, it has become possible for candidates securing just 15-20 per cent of the votes polled to get elected from certain constituencies. Everyone knows that communal and caste considerations weigh heavily at the time of elections. That is why we find the rise of several political parties based mainly on loyalties to castes and sub-castes, though they may adopt attractive high-sounding names to present themselves as representatives of the whole nation. Since people get elected without any reference to their political ideology, our electoral system has encouraged the formation of very small parties and shifting of loyalties from one party to another without incurring any penalties under the Anti-Defection Law. FPTP has also encouraged the so-called independent candidates to contest elections and get elected. In Jharkhand, there are six independent MLAs with no fixed loyalty to any ideology. And there are also about half-a-dozen small parties, each with one or two members in the Assembly.

State legislatures get badly fractured because of large number of independents and single-member parties who are in a position to wield highly disproportionate clout in bargaining for power and getting portfolios of their choice. These independents and single-member parties lack the basic requirement for the parliamentary system of democracy, namely representative credentials.

An equally serious danger in small parties and independents getting undue weightage is that it gives us "honourable ministers" who may not have the qualifications or credibility required for important responsibilities in government. The need for rectifying this deficiency has become particularly urgent in view of the fact that coalition governments have become inevitable at the Centre and in most states. A feasible remedy for this anomaly is to introduce legislation limiting the selection of ministers for coalition governments only if they have a prescribed minimum number of legislators.

When ever suggestions are made for legislative action to correct deficiencies in the working of our democratic system, some people point out that legislation should not be the remedy for such problems and cite the successful working of this system in most western countries. But it would be wrong to compare the parliamentary system of our democracy with that of advanced countries in the West. Of course, legislation by itself may be inadequate to cure all maladies of our democratic system. But legislation will certainly be better than leaving such important matters to the good sense of politicians and their commitment to political morality and ethics. The developments in Jharkhand have amply proved this.

Dr P.C. Alexander was the governor of Tamil Nadu and Maharashtra