Subir Roy: Ramlila Maidan no Tiananmen Square

After the self-congratulatory moment, it is critical to ask: what lessons can be learnt and what are the milestones that have to be crossed

After living for days on a knife-edge, the nation deserves to congratulate itself a little. A conflict that could have gone seriously awry, involving hundreds of thousands of people across the country, was finally resolved through give and take. Parliament’s sovereign space and the dignity and authority of the government of the day remained intact, as did the people’s right to protest peacefully and demand promise of action, if not action itself. Democracy worked, Ramlila Maidan did not turn into Tiananmen Square. The parallel is real because currently the middle classes in China are racked by severe disaffection over entrenched corruption. Even as many in India have complained about intrusive 24-hour news channels, China has continued to police the Internet and stifle opinion forming and exchange of information via viral progression.

 

But after the self-congratulatory moment, it is critical to ask: what lessons can be learnt from the climactic few days’ experience, and what are the milestones that have to be crossed before the nation can give itself a system that cracks down sharply and effectively on corruption and over time gives itself a far cleaner public life than what prevails today? The first lesson is that public discourse has to be conducted in civil tenor and tone. Not just the Congress spokesman but even party leaders who have to take responsibility for what one of their functionaries said should apologise for the offensive remarks about Anna Hazare.

The second is that though people (essentially lawyers), no matter how brilliant, can play a useful part in protracted negotiations, particularly over the contours of a proposed legislation, at the end of the day the political leadership has to take the lead. There was a dearth of this until towards the end, hence the initial floundering. If Parliament had abdicated for decades, causing a mass upsurge to challenge its authority, then it is Parliament – made up of parties across the spectrum – that has to retrieve its space.

It is not enough for government leaders to keep repeating that Parliament is supreme, the entire Parliament has to say so and government leaders have to sit down with parties to enable a unified voice to emerge. Initially, it seemed Manmohan Singh wasn’t in charge, nor did he have the inclination to be so. Eventually, after Rahul Gandhi’s speech sank without a trace, political authority appears to have been asserted. Maybe this has been Prime Minister Singh’s baptism by fire, when he was left alone on the burning deck and had to lead in dousing the fire.

The third lesson is for civil society: it must get rid of its rough edges. Otherwise, there cannot be a meeting of minds. Mr Hazare is a natural, and having been in a way outside of the system, he has his angularities and outlandish views. A test may come on issues like the right to recall and reject — attractive radical ideas that may not deliver what matters in a large democracy. Some of the rough edges on that side also come in the shape of lawyers who, as a class, appear to have more than their share of abrasiveness. It is worth remembering that ultimately it is a politician from Maharashtra who spoke the same language as Mr Hazare and a swami, again with prior experience in communicating, who could set up a channel.

Finally, let us rejoice that the odd ones out have already begun to fall by the wayside in a journey that is likely to be long and arduous. Anyone remember Ramdev? And do we realise the symbolism of two little girls – one Dalit, another Muslim – performing the final puja, so to speak? It is immaterial whether the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh had been stage-managing the whole movement from behind; no one has any doubt that for a mass movement to succeed, its all-embracing credentials have to be beyond question. If better off, TV-viewing, networked middle class Hindus thought that India was them and they were India, then they will have been disabused of such a notion. India’s minorities (Dalits, tribals, backward classes, Muslims) make up its majority and it is this heterogeneous body, unlike the dominant Han Chinese in China, that makes up the nation.   

In the long journey to achieve a largely corruption-free India, it will be important to keep sight of the basics. The Lok Pal will have to be an institution to which the smallest individual or the loneliest whistle-blower should be able to complain. The Lok Pal should be able to investigate and prosecute the highest in the land. Since the higher judiciary is so tainted it is not clear why it cannot be brought firmly within the ambit of the Lok Pal. Why wait for another Bill for them? And why shouldn’t legislators also come under the Lok Pal when so many of them have criminal colours and have won through black money-funded election campaigns?

A mechanism has to be found whereby the Lok Pal does not get bogged down investigating every other patwari, though the Lok Pal’s doors must be open for those who have not found justice elsewhere. Naturally, the investigating agency will have to be autonomous and its leader, like the Lok Pal, will have to be chosen through a non-partisan process. And the Lok Pal himself will have to be answerable for his own conduct through a suitable mechanism. These are some of the indisputable fundamental principles. The edifice has to be built around them by expert craftsmen over a long period.

subirkroy@gmail.com