Thursday, December 4, 2008

Enabling good people to participate in elections

Everybody talks about the need for good people to enter into politics. Yes, good people are willing to enter into politics but not in the present mess. Today winning elections is not about the candidate, his policies and reputation but factors other than these. Those impediments have to be eliminated to lessen the trepidations to enable a good citizen to become a politician. Here are some suggestions in this regard:


1. Remove symbols from the election process.

Party symbols have become trademark logos. No matter how good a citizen is, the right to use this symbol is available only to a core party worker. The definition of a core party worker is too well known to document.


The only option left for a good citizen is to contest as an independent candidate. An independent candidate no matter how hard he tries can never beat the cult status that a party symbol has acquired.


Uneducated people vote for the symbol rather than the person. It is time we decoupled party symbols from our elections (both in canvassing and voting mode).This will ensure that only candidates with good reputation are elected and consequently political parties will be compelled to field candidates with good reputation.


2. Limit the period for election.


The gap between announcing elections and declaration of results runs into months. Sustaining a campaign for such a length of time involves expenditure which cannot be sustained by an honest citizen.

The state machinery has to be ready to go in the designated year of elections. The time gap between announcing elections and declaration of results should not be more than 30 days. In case of a mid-term poll, this can be extended by 15 days.


There should not be any scope for withdrawal of nominations. Why do you require a leader who in the first place is not sure whether to contest elections or not?




3. Make the manifesto more realistic and performance measurable.


Companies are responsible for the statements made in their prospectus. They have to justify the projections made. They cannot give gifts at their AGMs. No guidelines are applicable to the manifestos of political parties.


There has to be accountability for the statements made by political parties in their manifestos. Only those statements which reflect the founding principles of the constitution should be allowed to be included in a party manifesto/ candidate speech/publicity material. Economically unviable and frivolous promises like free color TV should not be allowed to be included in a manifesto/candidate speech/publicity material.


Promises in a manifesto should be measurable with probable date of completion. A party which does not complete 75% of its promises should be banned from contesting. This should be applicable for both the ruling and the main opposition. This would compel both these parties on issue of public welfare. This would ensure that they do not disrupt Parliament proceedings frequently since they have the burden of performance. This would also ensure that fancy promises which cannot be implemented are not made. It would also ensure that a honest citizen contesting as an independent has a level playing field with the political parties when it comes to the manifestos.


4. Removing criminals and corrupt from the election process

Today a citizen convicted by the court for a criminal offence cannot stand for elections. We all know how many years it takes to get a person, especially if he is a politician convicted, for a criminal offence. The parameter should be changed from conviction to admitting of the case for prosecution by the High Court. A person who has been denied bail by the court on more than 3 occasions for offences of murder, rape, rioting should be denied the right to contest.


As of now Politicians are required to only give their property returns. This is not sufficient and should be changed to providing proof of income for acquiring such property, if it is not inherited. If it stated that the property is inherited, proof for the same should be provided.


There is no point in saying that good people do not enter politics when the present circumstances are hopelessly pitted against them. Let a level playing field be established, the good people would flock in.

No comments: