Indian Democracy   "A flawed democracy" by PC Alexander, Asian Age, 22 April 2009 [Alexander was Indian Commissioner in London and later Governor of Tamil Nadu & Maharashtra]   We in India take pride in preserving the institution of democracy, even though the country has serious problems of poverty, illiteracy and unemployment. But ob the criterion of quality, we are categorised as a 'flawed democracy'. According to the annual survey published by the Global Research Org's Economist Intelligence Unit, India appears in the category of 50 "flawed democracies" covered by the survey. 30 are full democracies, 36 are hybrid democracies and 51 authoritative regimes.   We may ask why our country is not recognised as a full democracy when we have constitutional guarantees of fundamental rights, free and fair elections supervised by the Election Commission, plurality of choice, independent judiciary and a free press. The truth we have clear deficiencies in the functioning  of our democratic system and our uncritical acceptanceof the basic flaws prevents us from graduating to a full democracy.  What are these flaws?   Flaw 1) A low level of people's participation in the democratic process; The extent of people's participation is the most important criterion for assessing the strength of our democracy. Because of the large electorate, the democracy is necessarily representative but the participation is practically limited to the casting of votes at election time.   Flaw 2) A degradation of our political culture Our political parties have in most cases instruments of power for a few individuals and their families. Elections to various party posts have been substituted by nominations by the party supremo and those occupying such positions never  have the necessary credentials. The rank and file are not informed about discussions between leaders on pre-election alliances and these discussions usually fail because of lack of agreement on the sharing seats. Even crucial decisions like choice of ally are taken by the party high commands and the lower cadres only get to know the outcome after decisions are taken. Lack of inner party democracy has been the bane of almost all Indian political parties.   Most people believed that India would grow into a healthy democracy after independence because of Gandhi's legacy. Gandhi had insisted on strict adherence to principles of absolute integrity, honest means and ends, and a firm commitment to the welfare of the poor. Unfortunately, his wishes were put aside after his death and few leaders rose to the high values that he had set. Instead, pervasive corruption in all walks of public life has become the norm. People have ceased to be shocked at current practices at election campaigns - the unashamed use of cash-for-votes, candidates with a record of murder and rape, the exploitation of communal and caste loyalties. The 2009 elections may set an all-time high 'cash-for-votes' record and senior leaders have stooped to the lowest ethical level of personal vilification and abuse of their rivals.   (END) =============== India holds elections regularly and large numbers vote. But the lot of the masses remains largely unchanged: - some 80% of the population live on Rs 20 or less a day. 8 Millennium Development Goals were proposed by the UN in 2000: - to eradicate extreme poverty and malnutrition, - to have primary education for all, - empower women, improve maternal health, reduce child mortality, - ensure adequate water and sanitation for all, combat mass diseases like TB, HIV/Aids, malaria These are unlikely to be achieved by the target date, 2015. Malnutrition and illiteracy are high. Over 6,000 children under the age of six die everyday from hunger and malnutrition.  An international report issued in Oct 08: “A number of Indian states have "alarming" levels of hunger while in Madhya Pradesh  the situation is "extremely alarming", comparable to the African countries of Ethiopia and Chad…”   The 90s saw the imposition of the neo-liberal economic doctrine and the rise of a business-friendly climate. The people may exercise their franchise but the members of the national parliament or local assemblies, once elected, ignore the people’s welfare and remain in cahoots with big business which assures them cuts and commissions for projects. So what sort of democracy does India have?   ** Voter participation A large proportion of people vote in elections, so the electoral process is a huge success. Historian R Guha in his book India After Gandhi: The History of the World's Largest Democracy (Picador India, 2007) commented: “In the first general elections, voter turnout was less than 46 per cent. Over the years, this has steadily increased; from the late 1960s about 3 out of 5 eligible Indians have voted on election day. In assembly elections, the voting percentage has tended to be even higher…”   But high electoral participation can be dangerous without strong moral restraints and commitment to social welfare. Majoritism can be abused by extremist groups. Winning a majority can be used for subversive ends, unless the state is vigilant and proper restraints are imposed.. Thus in several states, the Hindu majorities have become instruments for oppressing minorities - Muslims and Christians. There is a growing danger that India’s democracy morphing into extremism and fascism.  Sivanandan, Director of the Institute of Race Relations, had warned (15May08): ”Electoral democracy is exactly what today's far Right use as their vehicle - through populism to power. True democracy is underpinned in social welfare, local autonomy, civil liberties and rule of law. “ Saba Naqvi Bhaumik (Outlook online 18 Mar 2002): "Asians living under dictatorships now ask me whether Indian democracy is a cover for brute majoritism"   ** About political parties & candidates However, the voters do not get to select the candidates of their choice. It is done by the party machine which is corrupt and has close corporate ties. The background and record of candidates is not properly vetted. And even corrupt or criminal candidates are accepted. The franchise may be universal but voters, especially in the rural areas, are mostly illiterate. Can they make informed decisions on issues? Often such voters are duped (literally with wads of cash) by corrupt candidates or party officials. Again let’s hear Guha: “Is India a proper democracy or a sham one? The answer is well, 50-50. It mostly is, when it comes to holding elections and permitting freedom of movement and expression. It mostly is not, when it comes to the functioning of politicians and Parliament. Most political parties have become family firms. Most politicians are corrupt, and many come from a criminal background. “ *** No internal party democracy The US primaries in 2008 should have taught out Indian leaders a lesson or two about democracy in action. We saw candidates of each party moving from state to state, mingling with people, answering questions, trying to win them over to their position – all under a 24-hour media spotlight. Can you imagine Sonia Gandhi going from state to state trying to persuade Congress workers why she is the best candidate for party leader? Can you imagine LK Advani in a televised debate against Narendra Modi and other BJP stalwarts? *** Oldies in charge Indian political parties are still run by closed elites and driven by a feudal ethos. In the absence of robust, inner-party democracy, it’s no wonder that young leaders find it hard to rise within the system. As a result, India is saddled with oldies like unelected PM Manmohan Singh (75) or leader of the opposition LK Advani (80). Contrast with EU leaders like Gordon Brown (56), Nicolas Sarkozy (53) and Angela Merkel (53). Barack Obama, Democrat hopeful, is a mere 46. Read more on India’s unelected PMs   ** Western model inappropriate In short, the western model of democracy imported into India has not worked well. It has not been adapted to Indian conditions and no high-powered thinkers have come forward and devised a more appropriate model. But Guha says that “India has amended and modified theories of democracy based on the experience of the West. It has even more frontally challenged ideas of nationalism emanating from the Western experience.” So what are these ‘theories’ of democracy that India has proposed? Guha doesn’t elaborate.