Day 2 of Anna Hazare’ fast has seen a lot of action with this letter to the Prime Minister
RT “@vikramchandra: Anna Hazare's 5-point letter to PM… http://t.co/xkJmkqD"”—
Offstumped (@offstumped) April 06, 2011
and overwhelming support from political parties, individual MPs like Rajeev Chandrashekhar
Came to Delhi and met Anna Hazare..expressed my support & solidarity to his leadership of Lokpal bill & fight against rot in govt ! Jai Hind—
Rajeev Chandrasekhar (@rajeev_mp) April 06, 2011
And from public intellectuals like B. Raman among others.
Enough
http://ramanstrategicanalysis.blogspot.com/2011/04/enough.html—
BAHUKUTUMBI RAMAN (@ramthink) April 06, 2011
As the debate rages further on the Lokpal Bill it must be pointed out that this debate goes to the heart of a subconscious conflict on the role of government. I am characterizing this conflict as subconscious for seem to be unaware of the many contradictions we hold simultaneously on where we want government intervention and where we don’t leading to many paradoxes.
Paradox #1 – We trust what we cant control, we don’t trust what we can control
It is paradoxical that those advocating for an Ombudsmen independent of the 3 arms of government – Executive, Legislature and Judiciary have no faith in those that we elect while simultaneously having immense faith in those we don’t elect. This goes right to the heart of the question – what is our attitude to government ?
We don’t trust Government we elect or indirectly control yet we trust an Ombudsmen on sheer good faith while exercising no control.
Paradox #2 – We want to a credible platform to influence Legislation yet we bypass the one platform that exists to make Legislation
From the Sonia Gandhi NAC variety Left Liberal NGOs to the Anna Hazare lead Anti Corruption NGOs there is a bipartisan consensus on subordinating Parliament and elected Lawmakers in the process of law making. Parliament exists for law making. Members of Parliament get paid by the tax payer to represent the interests of their constituents and thus be the interface for society’s inputs into law making. Yet we don’t trust the interface society has elected but we trust this unelected nebulous entity called “civil society” to write laws. Now if only the energy put in by these NGOs in national campaigns were to be channelized towards effective law making then both Parliament and Parliamentarians would be more accountable. But paradoxically we don’t believe Parliament as a platform can be effective but a National Advisory Council can however be effective.
This highlights yet another attitude towards government that when we speak of democracy we don’t actually believe in its mechanisms and the hardworking it takes to make them effective.
Paradox #3 – For Independence to others not quite so on Independence to self
This is the strangest of all paradoxes. Look at our irrational exuberance in advocating for Independence for an unelected Ombudsman in the naive hope that he or she will be gainful guardian of our interests. Now contrast this with the deep skepticism and stubborn resistance in granting ourselves Independence to be guardians of our own economic self interest. We will trust a 3rd party sitting in Delhi with our interests but we cannot trust ourselves with the freedom to make our own economic choices.
This last paradox raises deep questions on whether Anna Hazare has discarded all that he stood for in the 1970s when he lead the transformation of Ralegan Siddhi. That transformation was rooted in the exact opposite attitude where in the people of Ralegan Siddhi trusted their own judgement on making decisions that were right for their village rather than deposing faith in some bureaucrat sitting in Delhi.
That Anna Hazare who stood for this ethic which repudiates the centralized one size fits all approach of th NAC Left Liberals should now seek to adopt their methods to law making, highlights all that is paradoxical about this fast.
Related tweets:
A monologue response to all the comments on latest blogpost on Anna Hazare's fast – Now playing on http://Offstumped.in/live—
Offstumped (@offstumped) April 05, 2011
RT“@calamur: My issues with the Proposed Jan Lok Pal Bill http://t.co/WkUu0Gy”—
Offstumped (@offstumped) April 06, 2011
RT“@SundeepDougal: RT @PRSLegislative: Lokpal Bill issues surrounding it? Read the PRS note: http://t.co/sfXOTfI”—
Offstumped (@offstumped) April 06, 2011
Filed under: Offstumped
You are playing the Devils advocate, due credit on that.
But in this need for wanting to intellectually oppose what Anna Hazare started, pls do acknowledge that Day 2 of his fasting is building into something far bigger (I think). Do give credit where it is due.
Surely this has brought about a huge pressure on a deaf and dumb Govt (the elected representatives?) leaving no doubt, that the people of this country are mighty unhappy with them!
And finally Anna Hazare is not a man who doesn’t know the system. He has been a social activist for far longer than I have lived, and yes I do indeed trust his motives – More than I do the ruling party/opposition! You can deride him, take away his credit, but that doesn’t make him any smaller or less convincing!
nice post, but your entire argument is based on the premise that we are the ones who are electing the legislature and executive which is a bit of a problem.
I just hope that was the case, Do you think they are getting elected without any offerings they give to the voters.
Tamilnadu is a case to ponder. Here with the elections due, money is flowing like anything. Off course the onus is on voters to elect honest and sane people, but what options they have to chose from. Thats the question.
Offstumped:
Great analysis… thought-provoking and mostly agreeable. Most of the people who support Anna do not understand the fact that things have come to such a pass because of their apathy in exercising democratic duties as citizen i.e. utilizing the power of vote to effect change.
On the other side, looking at the Jan Lokpal bill, the independent ombudsman is necessity as public official or representative cannot be fair arbiter of justice in the system he/she is part of. There is vested interest in the system to protect each other and we need independent authority that can dispassionately look at corruption in public sector. It might not be perfect solutions or there is no guarantee it works but at least we can see what doesn’t works and fix it as it comes.
the interface you mention has been letting us down despite our trust which has led to this “nebulous” whatever taking action for change.
the ones entrusted with running the system, the elected lawmakers, are undermining it so please point your guns at them. why are we imputing that an ombudsman will be quasi-legal or extra-legal.
till you can suggest a mechanism for removing discretionary powers of the politicians and loopholes in the law (and it gets implemented), the janlokpal will have to be there.
in the present scenario, the corrupt escape, with the janlokpal they won’t because of the checks and balances in the bill. don’t put the onus on the people, its about accountability of those responsible.
[...] Older » [...]
[...] has already been said on the perils of an Ombudsman independent of the Constitutional separation of powers between Executive, Legislature and Judiciary. In response to the criticism asking what are the [...]
The fight against corruption must go further into extenuating judicial delays all over the country wherein many go to their eternal rest before justice can be administered. Justice delayed is justice denied, something which might some day attract the United Nations Human Rights Commission. Before that happens let the fight against corruption be extended to cover this menace as well as all litigation prone laws which need revision.