Was Indira, Gandhi enough?
It is not graceful to be critical of a Prime Minister on her anniversary. Yet it is not easy to forget the damages that the Prime Minister did to the process of democratic evolution in a country that was fighting hard to survive against the genetics of monarchy.
Her achievements are abound no doubt. Abolishing private banking, nationalising mining and liberating East Pakistan as Bangladesh were drastic decisions lending enormous power to the less privileged or the more deprived people. If it was not for the public sector enterprises the middle and lower income groups in India would not have seen wider opportunities for employment. The private industries neither had the resources, nor the capacity or the drive to establish large enterprise. They simply would not have invested as much. It is a genetic issue, very visible today when despite several emerging opportunities, the giants limited themselves to profiteering within India. At least the Government bankers reached out to include less accessible geographies in India so that more people would have access to capital and other banking services.
Bangladesh was a phenomenal success, as its people found a proud existence than being the poor cousin of West Pakistan.
However, with a will to execute predetermined goals, Indira Gandhi did not have the patience to let the law of the land prevail. Over a period of time she pushed ahead the Executive Bodies to compromise on the values and the framework of the Constitution of India.
The Constitution of India is perhaps more vital to the country it meticulously cuts across the challenges of multiple diversities. It challenges the civilisation weaknesses in a way that yield a place of pride for India amidst the evolving world. Provided of course if it is followed for the sake of national prosperity. It enables the people to evolve with a sense of discipline and integrity. It is uniquely endowed to help humanity evolve whether one is rich or not, educated or not, equal or not, and even loyal or not.
The election process of a Government itself is an example of how the country can emerge powerful against a history of turning weaker. It is not designed to mobilise the electorate in favour of a candidate, or even a party. Look at it closer, it is simply designed to elect the most competent or relevant representation at its micro levels upwards. One that ensures the continuity of the chair of governance more powerful than the person occupying it periodically. The difference between the Indian Constitution and others is that it obstructs the path of an individual turning popularly powerful. In fact it attempts to subvert every such possibility.
Whilst the Prime Mininsters of India before Indira Gandhi graced the chair with honour, Indira Gandhi began the process of guarding the one occupying it without a genuine need for it. The process gradually emerged to coerce the laws.
Once the law breaks at the top, can you stop it from destroying its fabric on the streets?
Despite several crimes, India was a country of noble people with strong faith and trust in its Governments. Not just law abiding but law fearing as well.
Crossing the boundaries of law got a booster of sorts, and its impact on the politics of India were immense. While she may have acted rudely to check the opposition gaining favours, she also permitted the opposition to turn more rude.
One wonders how long India will take to overcome the brutal disaffection towards the law of the land. One wonders how much more the test of good governance will lie in how ‘strong’ a Government is. One wonders if at all one will see citizens inspired by the power to be just, fair and graceful, and its Government enabling that further.
The successive fall of the Governments in India in the 80s
and 90s may be seen as the weaker period of a feee India. Yet the continuity of democratic governance justifies the strength of the India founded in 1947. In fact that period ought to be considered more successful against testing times. Weaker Governments elected constitutionally may not be as powerfully endowed to deliver. Yet they are more likely to yield a better nation over time. On the other hand, the examples laid by Indira Gandhi to deliver unconstitutionally will continue to haunt India being susceptible to autocratic rule of law for a long time. Every enormously powerful government in India will be tempted to attempt at making the Indira Gandhi rules of law better.
At the moment one can see such an attempt by the current Prime Minister Modi.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Readers make a Writer. Your views and comments will help me write for you better. In appreciation. Happy Reading!