The Jamshedpur model for India

The world over, it is an article of faith that elected representatives should control all forms of government. The fact that most politicians are inept is immaterial. The harm they cause is accepted as the unavoidable price to be paid for democracy. This uncritical faith is a misplaced reading of the founding principles of democracy. Rousseau, who championed and pioneered the basic principles of democracy, based his thesis on a two-part argument: one, citizens should control their own civic and political destiny. Two, as few citizens have the skills, the talent, the experience and the resources to manage civic and political affairs, it is best for them to enter into a 8216;social contract8217; with those who have the skills, talent and experience to perform the task.

Social contract implies that civic management should be handed over to experts. Unfortunately, the manner in which citizens8217; representatives are chosen does not guarantee that such a specification will be realised in practice. This basic stipulation has been eroded to such an extent that it stands negated altogether. It is now considered improper to call for even the barest minimum qualifications from any contender for political office.

This perverse transformation of the fundamental principles of the social contract is the result of confusion between the rights and privileges in democracy. Strictly speaking, only the freedom to vote is a fundamental right; to stand for elections is a privilege, not a right. Irrespective of one8217;s competence, every citizen has the right to vote but only experts can claim the privilege to stand for elections.

There is a naive view that elections will throw up competent people. Competition for office, it is argued, will automatically bring to the fore talented people. This is a fundamental misconception. No competition operates among legislators. On the face of it, the argument that legislators do not compete among themselves would appear absurd. Undoubtedly, there is competition among politicians for getting elected but there is no competition at all after they have been elected in the matter of their duties being discharged. Once elected, legislators enjoy unbridled monopoly power.

In truth, elections are best for identifying critics but not for selecting performers. Further, good critics are not necessarily good performers. For instance, few of the critics who comment on the way cricket is played can go to the middle and demonstrate how to play in the manner they recommend.

Experience of democracy over the past two centuries has shown that, to be effective, the social contract requires two distinct operations: one, the identification of competent performers; and two, the specifying of standards to ensure compliance. Elections are appropriate in the latter case but not for identifying professionally competent experts.

In the City of London and in Jamshedpur we have a working model for the efficient delivery of civic services. Both in the City of London and in Jamshedpur, employers deliver civic services at zero cost to the citizens 8212; there are no municipal taxes. In effect, elected politicians outsource the management of civic affairs without surrendering their powers to decide how those affairs should be managed.

At present, politicians function as complainants, prosecutors, jury, judge and executioners, all rolled into one. Experience shows that politicians function best as prosecutors, and only prosecutors. The ideal system would be in three parts: the first is composed of experts who will deliver civic services. The second, composed of legislators who will give voice to citizens and stipulate standards. Finally, the third, composed of judges who will adjudicate on complaints and penalise non-performers.

Instead of destroying the Jamshedpur model, we should in fact extend it to the whole country: impose on employers the responsibility for delivering civic services and at their own cost. Elected representatives will confine themselves to the task of stipulating what should be done and prosecuting those who fail to perform; and judges will arbitrate disputes between the professional service providers and their democratic critics. The social contract cannot succeed without such separation of powers and responsibilities.

The writer is former director of IIT Chennai