Governance review needed for correctives

Two-third of the citizenry is in poverty, the education system is a shambles. We may have to face the wrath of an unemployable youth sometime in the future.

The nation is shortly approaching 70 years of age. This is not too short a time to review the governance/administrative structure, and see if we are on the right track. Surely there have been many bright spots in the past decades, however, the failures are basic and stand out in sharp relief. Two-third of the citizenry is in poverty (half of these, abjectly so). The education system is a shambles, quality has sharply deteriorated. This bodes ill for the future; the country may have to face the wrath of hordes of unemployed and unemployable youth sometime in the future — the dividing line between demographic dividend and disaster is thin. The country has among the worst public health standards in the world. Delhi is the most polluted city in the world. Corruption in the states is rampant; the litany of woes, testament to seven decades of mismanagement, is palpable. There may be no apparent immediate threat to sustainability of democracy, but is democracy to be defined merely as providing the citizen with the “right to vote”? The state of the nation is like a living organism, it has either to improve or deteriorate; status quo is unnatural. Change is the only constant. The vectors of governance need review to see what correctives are to be applied.

Take the legislature — the good news, if one can call it that, is that not much needs to be done. In India, generally “omission” is no offence; the legislature, at the Centre or the states, can hardly take credit for any positive moves. It has remained basically a forum for sterile debates, and exhibition of partisanship. Its ignominious role in “legitimising” the Emergency decades back is largely forgotten. It has also equally shown itself to be toothless — recall that a few years back, it passed a resolution to create the Lokpal, at midnight. By daybreak, this was forgotten. Again, recall that a recent Joint Parliamentary Committee ( JPC), when entrusted with an important investigation (the telecom scam), forgot or refused to record the statement of the three principal actors — the Prime Minister, the Finance Minister and the then Telecom Minister; the highest “investigative agency” of the land probably never heard of the most fundamental principle of the Evidence Act or the CrPC — to get information recorded from the persons “most likely to know”. Is there any wonder that the various Central and state investigative agencies almost invariably bark up the wrong tree, mostly deliberately?

One additional word needs to be added regarding the role of the Upper House, the Rajya Sabha. Created on the model of the House of Lords, it was envisaged to be populated by persons with knowledge and experience, able to think above party lines in overall national interest — not a berthing place for exparty hacks, and luminaries from the film and sports world. Surely the time has come to review the need for this chamber, or at least to defang it.

In short, nobody expects anything from our Parliament. No major suggestions, therefore, are required for its improvement.

The less said about the state legislatures, the better. These are purely cockpits for display of party politics. One should seriously consider if these chambers need to meet only for two days every year, for renewing (or denying) a vote of confidence, and to rubberstamp the legislation placed before it. At least we can agree on one area where nothing much needs to be done.

Before moving on to the executive, it needs to be mentioned that the judiciary is in urgent need of reforms. Lalu Yadav’s case has been going on for three decades; the saga of Jayalalithaa’s wealth is also about two decades old — should it take the judicial system two decades or more to finally pronounce whether a politician is a crook or a saint? — particularly when the facts involved are not too complicated. Is it fair to the people of India that they be led for long periods by unprincipled politicians, who use the good offices of the court to filibuster and delay, with every tactic including interminable interlocutory applications? A Rajat Gup- ta in the United States was convicted within one year, including finalisation of three appeals, based on one authenticated phone conversation. By contrast, witness the vicissitudes of the Salman Khan hit and run case. One wag, facetiously mentioned that it would not be surprising that in another case, a suicide note is suddenly discovered from a long-dead chinkara. The powerful and the rich seem to have little fear — only have disdain for the law; the poor are helpless.

No initiative for serious reform is being taken by anyone in authority, from the executive or the judiciary. No changes in procedure have been attempted for a century or more; it is as if digital technology and video is not known to India. The FIR/investigation processes are generally highly polluted, the prosecution is mostly very poor, collusive, unsupervised and unaccountable — the courts are generous in permitting interminable long adjournments. Swift, exemplary, deterrent punishment is the only way to manage law and order effectively. “Iqbal” — general respect and fear of the law is the key; this is totally missing today.

The judiciary is surely meant to function as an umpire on legal matters presented to it; surely there is also an administrative responsibility to ensure that not only justice is done, but also fairly and expeditiously. Red-herring excuses like lack of funding or court- rooms are unacceptable. One has the highest possible regard and respect for the glorious moments given to the country by our higher judiciary; indeed they have “saved” the country, the citizen and civil liberties innumerable times. Without qualitative change in investigation, prosecution and time taken in disposal of cases, there is no “rule of law” in the country. The Apex Court needs to take things firmly under direct control. The initiative and responsibility in this regard vests with the Judiciary.

In the second part we will turn to role of the executive and the appurtenant institutional mechanisms. T.S.R. Subramanian is a former Cabinet Secretary. This is the first of A two-pArt Article.

In India, generally “omission” is no offence; the legislature, at the Centre or the states, can hardly take credit for any positive moves. It has remained basically a forum for sterile debates, and exhibition of partisanship. Its ignominious role in “legitimising” the Emergency decades back is largely forgotten. It has also equally shown itself to be toothless.