Strange discipline

The joint drafting committee for the Lokpal bill joint because it is composed half of representatives of the duly constituted government,and half of individuals nominated by Anna Hazare,a social activist from Maharashtra was due to meet on Monday. However,the five civil society members of the committee didnt turn up to work. This was,they said,in protest against the breakup of yoga guru Ramdevs public meeting at the Ramlila grounds in Delhi,although they are,of course,members of Team Anna and not Team Baba. Missing a day of work,even if you had to fast to get the job,is not the most terrible of crimes; but the statements that accompanied the announcement of their decision not to attend were considerably more worrying.

One worries about the commitment of these committee members when one of them claims that the prime minister should resign immediately and form a caretaker government and others call for yet more fasts. They are,as yet,merely members of an unfortunately formed committee of dubious legitimacy; yet it has done little but swell their desire to arrogate to themselves the right to speak for society at large. It is far from certain whether the combative,politicians-are-already-wrong approach they have refused to forego once they won their notification-enabled victory will allow them to make a constructive contribution to hammering out the final details of a strong,effective Lokpal bill that Parliament will pass. That some of them,who have a stated commitment to civil liberties,felt it was necessary to comment adversely on the governments use of Section 144 to clear the Ramlila Maidan is not unsurprising; and participation in a drafting committee does not take away a citizens right to express herself about such issues. But the tone and tenor of the remarks,as well as the willingness to try and piggyback on the numbers that Ramdev brings to the table,do not encourage one to think that these members will sit down to work with the governments nominees in good faith.

Such concern,of course,should have been anticipated by the government. Who,after all,are such nominees accountable to? If it is merely the court of public opinion as they see it,will they not have to raise their pitch every second so as to prove their relevance? Will there not be,always,someone outside the committee room,on the streets,who would otherwise supplant them in noisiness? The error was accepting the joint drafting committee in the first place,an error which it is not too late to correct.