Is Jan Lok Pal Bill evil?

It is interesting to see all the intelligentsia coming in with their magnifying glasses and scrutinizing and critizing the minutae of the proposed draft of the bill. Constructive criticism will no doubt lead to a better bill, but I have an axe to grind with those who are summarily dismissive of the entire proposal.

I think we need to step back and look at the larger picture here. It is not the time to stand in impartial judgement over our civic activists. I don't think it's sufficient to be intellectually honest in these times, you have to be politically savvy. You have to figure out which side you are on!!! Politicians are very good at it. When the chips are down, they'll do anything to counter it, and get as close to power as possible. It is them that we are dealing with. Take the allegations against the bhushan's. Each allegation has another dimension to it, which involves politicians. And even if true, I think it ought to be much more damaging to the politicians than the bhushan's. Yet, no one is asking for head of politicians involved, the political chorus is only interested in bhusan's stepping down. You don't have to be an einstein to figure out who gains from all this. My personal view is that even if bhushan's are guilty, they can do no harm in helping with drafting of this bill, which is anyway being driven so transparently.

To the cynics of the bill, I want them to ponder over the following. Corruption is rampant, we all experience it every day, but not a single person is punished. This is despite all the media reports and awareness. Our PM claims he is bound by coalition politics. So, how do you propose to fix it? If you can come up with a comprehensive solution, present it and convince a larger set of people that your solution works. If not, step aside and don't create hurdles for those who are trying to do that. I seriously believe that if you spend enough time to understand the current system, and analyze why it fails so miserably, you will realize that there is no such thing as a perfect system. In fact, the current system is quite perfect theoretically, becasue it vests most powers in the elected government. But, this debate is not about theory, it's about practice.

When we have seen the theory to fail miserably, we have to go back to the drawing board to restate the assumptions (in this case that the elected representatives are supreme) and change the heuristics. I think this movement is about going from just "democracy" to "accountable and transparent democracy". The set of activists have studied this problem from within and have come up with some (maybe drastic) suggestions on how to fix it. It is not sufficient to say that their solution is not good enough (no solution will ever be good enough for everyone), but take it further and propose a better solution. And explain how the better solution will help to punish those who have been so deftly manouvering the current system.

It is easy to sit in judgement and pass comments, but it is another thing to work at your convictions and make things happen. I know better ideas exist, but I'll any day accept (and actively support) a sub-optimal idea which gets converted into practice over a brilliant idea which is never implemented!!! And I think we all need to do that for our own good...

What's wrong with Indian democracy?

I was intrigued the the criticism of the recent movement against corruption (led by Anna Hazare) by a select group of intellectuals. They claim that this threatens to subvert democracy by undermining the politicians, who are our elected leaders. But, what exactly does an elected leader mean in today's India? What motivates a person to run for elections? We all know that election expenses run into crores, and the winner of the election can not recover that much money on a complete lifetime of a politician's salary. So, how can an honest person even stand for an election without going bankrupt? Unless we fix this, we are stuck with politicians who are forced to recover their political expenses through corruption. And once the greed sets in, they don't stop at just recovering the expenses, they end up making tens and hundreds of times the money they spent. So, what's the solution? I propose that we should forbid the election candidates to spend even a single rupee on campaigning. Instead, the election commission should create a comprehensive platform (TV, newspapers, internet, public meetings, debates) where each candidate is given an equal exposure and a chance to put forward their views and positions. All the cost should be borne by the government. Any candidate violating this should be disqualified. I realized that I didn't even know who my elected representatives were. Once I found out who they were, I could find almost no information about them on the internet, there is no way to find out what their views are or what they stand for, or what they have done or plan to do for the region that they got elected from. Hoping for a fair debate between all the candidates in the next election is a distant dream!!! So, even if I do my homework for the next election, I don't think I will have any basis to vote. So, how does it matter if I vote or not? It is not enough to just insist that everyone should vote. We need to create forums where people get information about their candidates to be able to decide who to vote for. Also, one suggestion that has come up is that there should be an option on the ballot saying "None of the above". Given the current state of things, I feel very inclined to use that option until the candidates feel the need to reach out to me and "earn" their vote. Given all this, I think Indian democracy is in a bad shape, and those who suggest that pushing a stringent anti corruption bill (which politicians will do anything to prevent) will undermine democracy, are in complete denial of the present state of affairs. I think once the anti corruption bill is effectively used to punish some of the most corrupt politicians; some more electoral reforms are in place; and some more accountability is introduced in our governance, only then I will accept that the democracy that we have is worth preserving.