Opinion No-confidence commotion

Indian democracy has always prided itself on its noise and vibrancy. Despite being modelled on the Westminster system,it plays out on a much larger scale,it has gone on to invent its own idiom and culture. Yet it seems to have been logjammed by this debate about who is to call the shots over a “demand” made by the opposition.

The ruling party,adamant on the principle of “having its way”,seems arrogant sometimes; so does the opposition,not accepting a basic fact of electoral politics,that it has NOT been given a mandate to have its way,just its say.

Governments were criticised in the past,often ruthlessly,politicians lampooned and voted out,but all with the background hum of noisy debate in Parliament — ignored only because it was a constant and a stabiliser. So much so that the elite that often fashionably rubbished “representation” as a legitimate weapon wielded by those who won elections,was also almost coming round to the idea of politics,coming round to accepting the tortuous processes that working a democracy involve — of standing for something and then being in a position to wield power and formulate policy. And that you would wield power not because of “merit” narrowly understood,but through the act of “representation”,a simple and yet complicated idea in a country as diverse as India.

But now? With the opposition seemingly mesmerised by the possibility that it could embarrass the government by disabling its functioning till what it sees as the right way to probe a scam is put in place? And a ruling party equally anxious to push the fact that it “has the numbers”? They are both giving voters the impression that they’re throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

Walkouts,dharnas,protests and such like,even within the House,have been the norm for some years now,given that single-party brute majorities are a thing of the past. But even a boycott,or shouting and disruption for an hour every day,which had become almost routine,had a purpose. Indeed,a democratic purpose: conveying the extent of the anguish over an issue.

But altogether paralysing the functioning of an elected majority for weeks conveys something else entirely. More specifically,it plays into the worst prejudices of those who delight in trashing all politicians as thugs,and who feel cheered by the political class emerging as up to no good. Over half our electorate is below 25,asked to choose representatives by the time they are 18. A large part of their political schooling is thus what they see around them. For them,news of thwarted political forums,especially if the forum is the highest in the land,would only create and feed disdain. For others,it would further chip away at the hard-earned credibility of those who represent us.

South Asia’s stories,too often,have been those of elites — military,non-governmental sectors or even religious groups — that have been able to rule unelected for many years. Democracy,it was argued for years,is a luxury for a developing country,especially one with India’s size and issues. India’s neighbours,such as Bangladesh and Pakistan and at times even Sri Lanka,despaired over the “corruption” of institutions and the surrender and belittling of their political classes. India,of course,proved to be an exception. It rightly prided itself that its smooth and well-internalised system of political debate provided a stabilising backdrop as the country witnessed unpredictable twists and turns — identity tussles and upheavals,natural calamities,economic downturns and renewals. But now,with Parliament having a sign of “Rain,No Play” affixed outside,confidence in representatives’ ability to argue things out successfully is bound to be at an all-time low.

It may be unfashionable to be critical of someone,looking back with misty eyes,for his ability to mobilise numbers — the doyen of Sampoorn Kranti or Total Revolution,Jayaprakash Narayan. But when JP managed to mobilise “numbers” in the 1970s as a cry out for total change,and challenged the legitimacy of an elected government,his success tore through the lines,denying “legitimate” representation and the right of others to represent grievances. Of course,sometimes great things are achieved by pushing via agitations. Lazy governments are often shaken out of their stupor and forced to respond. But,all in all,in a huge country in which the only tool of influence most people have is their vote,rendering that tool ineffectual by trying to make Parliament irrelevant can only be bad news.

Both government and opposition shouldn’t be too smug about letting the stalemate continue,in the hope of wearing out the other. It has much more power to eventually erode their credibility and damage their long-term interests than they suspect. Call up any member of the National Assembly in our friendly neighbourhood Pakistan,and they will tell you exactly how much.

seema.chishti@expressindia.com