Posts

Showing posts with the label indian constitution

Why I am against reservation for women in legislature

The women’s reservation bill will disempower the voter, and reduce the incentive for the elected representative to be seriously concerned with the issues affecting the constituencies. It will also seriously undermine the prospect of inner party democratic structures, and empower the entrenched party leadership. More importantly, this amendment is completely unnecessary, since there is nothing that stops political parties to nominate more women candidates, if they were really committed to that cause. My article titled, " The political fallout of the battle of the sexes " was published in the monthly magazine, Pragati: The Indian National Interest Review, in April 2010. Symbolism plays a very important role in politics. So it was symbolic that on Monday, March 8th, 2010, the centenary of the International Women’s Day, the governing UPA coalition wanted to present the country with a constitutional amendment to empower women, by reserving 33 percent of the seats for women in nat...

Debasing India’s Democracy

The constitutional amendment to reserve seats for women, in a rotational basis, in national and state legislature was introduced as a historic step. While Rajya Sabha passed it after a tumultuous two days, it exposed the deep political fractures. If adopted, this legislation will seriously undermine the roots of democracy in India. I assess the political cost of reserving seats for women, in the article titled " Debasing India's Democracy ", in the Wall Street Journal Asia , on 9 March 2010. It was advertised as a historic day. On March 8, the centenary of International Women’s Day, India’s governing coalition planned to present the country with a constitutional amendment reserving 33% of the seats for women in national and state legislatures. However, it was not to be. The failure of the amendment to pass was dubbed by the law minister a national day of shame, as a few unruly MPs, particularly in the Rajya Sabha, the upper house, created such a ruckus that the house had ...

Decriminalising homosexual behaviour

Repealing IPC 377: Recognising diversity and dissent Delhi High Court has passed a landmark judgment that severely restricts the scope of the section 377 of the Indian Penal Code. The decision noted, “Respect for human rights requires that certain basic rights of individuals should not be capable in any circumstances of being overridden by the majority, even if they think that the public interest so requires. Other rights should be capable of being overridden only in very restricted circumstances. These are rights which belong to individuals simply by virtue of their humanity, independently of any utilitarian calculation.” In this article titled, " Recognising diversity and dissent " , published in Pragati: The National Interest magazine, in August 2009, I discuss the significance of decriminalising Section 377 of the penal code in the wider political and constitutional context. The Delhi High Court’s ruling decriminalising consensual adult homosexual acts has not only ena...

Anti-defection: A law endangering democracy

The anti-defection law is suppressing dissent and has only raised the price of switching loyalties. We need to dispassionately understand the real cost of driving political negotiations underground, I write in this article " A law endangering democracy ", published in the Mint, on 21 August 2008. Many were outraged at the display of cash in Parliament, during the trust vote, last month. But far worse was that the Prime Minister could not make his concluding statement, and that even if he had, it would have made no impact. Our anti-defection law has made parliamentary debates pointless, as in the process of substantive debate, if members of Parliament, or MPs, change their mind and defy their party whip, they face disqualification. With debates being defunct, inducements in cash or kind become the necessary tools to sway legislators. In a parliamentary democracy, numbers are important, but democracy is much more than just a numbers game. Democracy is not just about today’s ma...

Should India remain a socialist republic?

In the constituent assembly in 1948, Dr B R Ambedkar, the chairman of the drafting committee, had clearly reasoned why no political ideology, socialism or anything else, should be included in the Constitution, binding the future generations. But in 1976, under her emergency rule, Prime Minister Indira Gandhi introduced the 42 amendment which among many other things, also introduced "socialism" in to the preamble. Now, 0ver fifteen years since India began to liberalise and reform our economic system, and began a slow journey moving away from the socialist policies that had strangulated the economy, "Should India remain a socialist republic?" I ask this question in view of a recent PIL that raised the same question in the Supreme Court, on 5 February 2008. Last month, the Supreme Court issued notice to the Government of India and the Election Commission in response to a petition questioning the constitutionality of India being a socialist state. The judges wanted to...

Time to oust socialism from the constitution

Countries where socialism was the only political ideology of the state inevitably degenerated into dictatorship. At stake is the democratic and political process, which includes campaigning and convincing the people of any particular political ideology, I write in the Mint on 17 January 2008, that " ‘Our’ socialist agenda: the time to oust it has come " . The world has come to admire India’s democratic institutions. However, many may be unaware that in this, the largest democracy, all political parties have to profess the same political ideology—socialism. The Supreme Court has now asked the government and the Election Commission to explain this apparent paradox. Under the Representation of the People Act, all political parties in India have to pledge allegiance not only to the Constitution and integrity of India, but also to socialism. The socialist intent of the Preamble has been extended by law to the Representation of the People Act, 1951, (RP Act) through an amendment i...

Should India continue to be socialist?

Should we continue to hold that socialism as one of the cherished Constitutional goals of the Indian Republic? In this article, I discuss how "socialism" was discussed at the time of the making of our constitution, and why it was rejected. And then, I look at how it crept in to the constitution during the Emergency Days in 1976, and ask, what is its relevance of this anachronism today? A version of this article appeared in the Ananda Bazar Patrika (Bengali) on 17 January 2008, under the title " Should we be tied to socialism? " Last month, the Supreme Court issued notice to the Government of India and the Election Commission in response to a petition questioning the constitutionality of India being a socialist state. The judges wanted to hear about the practical and legal implications of having a socialist intent in the preamble which has led to the changes in the Representation of People Act, making it mandatory for all registered political parties in India to aff...

Restoring property rights, Protecting People

Fundamental right is not a luxury for the rich, but a necessity for the poor. The rich has the resources to protect their interest by any number of ways, the poor has nothing but the law to fall on. A version of this article of mine had appeared in the Bengali langugage newspaper, the Ananda Bazar Patrika in Calcutta, on 21 March 2007. A lot is being said about the tragedy of Singur and Nandigram in West Bengal, Parliament has been adjourned, yet not much light has been shed on the real significance of these protests by farmers on the issue of land acquisition. Brand Buddhadeb may have suffered a fatal blow, but despite the ideological melee, an undercurrent of awareness is spreading through the grassroots of society on an almost unheralded issue – protection of property rights. Political and social activists have been hurling arguments accusations, trying to score points against their rivals. If one wants to stress the need for industrialisation, the other calls for inclusive growth....