-
Indian Democracy: reality or myth?Author(s): Soli J.
SorabjeeSource: India International Centre Quarterly, Vol. 33, No.
2 (AUTUMN 2006), pp. 83-96Published by: India International
CentreStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/23005873 .Accessed:
06/09/2014 03:03
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the
Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
.http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars,
researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information
technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new
formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please
contact [email protected].
.
India International Centre is collaborating with JSTOR to
digitize, preserve and extend access to IndiaInternational Centre
Quarterly.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 14.139.122.40 on Sat, 6 Sep 2014
03:03:48 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
-
Soli J. Sorabjee
Indian Democracy: reality or myth?*
I
I
selected the present topic for the lecture because
V.M.Tarkunde
had an abiding faith in democracy and firmly believed in the
importance of adhering to democratic values.
No political term has been abused so indiscriminately as
'democracy'. It is amusing to notice patently totalitarian
regimes
flaunting the democratic label. I do not propose to indulge in
semantics
and regale you with various definitions of democracy, because I
have
in mind T.S. Eliot's quip that 'when a term has become so
universally sanctified as "democracy" I begin to wonder whether it
means
anything, in meaning too many things'.
Etymologically, democracy means the power of the people.
Government of the people, by the people, for the people, is the
sovereign definition of democracy. Even if democracy cannot
be
precisely and comprehensively defined we can recognize it by
some
of its essential features in action.
Regular, fair and free elections are the fundamental
unmistakable
indicia of democracy. The foundation of democracy is that people
have
the right to vote freely and fearlessly and thus rule through
their
elected representatives. Churchill, in felicitous language,
said: 'At the
bottom of all tributes paid to democracy is the little man,
walking into a little booth, with a little pencil, making a little
cross, on a little
bit of paper.' Justice Hugo L. Black of the United States
Supreme Court
articulated a central tenet of democratic governance when he
said:
* Delivered at the India International Centre on 25 July 2006,
as the First V.M. Tarkunde
Memorial Lecture
This content downloaded from 14.139.122.40 on Sat, 6 Sep 2014
03:03:48 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
-
84 / India International Centre Quarterly
'No right is more precious in a free country than that of having
a
voice in the election of those who make the laws under which we
must live.'
Let us turn now to the ground realities. The undeniable fact is
that corruption and criminalization have bedevilled the process of
free and fair elections. The power and tyranny of wealth
combined
with muscle force have subverted the system. In some parts of
the
country, democracy is treated as a harlot to be picked up in the
street
by a man with an AK-47. There are blatant and pervasive breaches
of
the law prescribing a ceiling on election expenses. Potential
lawmakers
begin their political careers as unashamed lawbreakers. The
limits of election expenditure prescribed are meaningless and
almost never
adhered to. Political parties, which have a fair share of the
criminal
elements, handle enormous funds, believed to be unaccounted
illicit
money, collected ostensibly for meeting party and electoral
expenditure. Electoral compulsions for funds become the
foundation of the super structure of corruption. As a result, it
becomes difficult
for the good and the honest to contest elections and gain entry
into Parliament and the state legislatures.
Election laws at present in force permit persons with
colourful
criminal backgrounds to contest elections. The recommendations
of the National Commission to Review the Working of the
Constitution
(NCRWC), and also of the Law Commission that persons against
whom charges have been framed by a court of law should be
disqualified from contesting elections have not at all been
heeded. For this all political parties have to bear their
proportionate share of
blame. The consequence is the disgusting spectacle of history
sheeters and criminals in Parliament and state legislatures, and
worse, also in
the Cabinet making laws and ruling us and our children.
Barring honourable exceptions, the prime motivation of these
elected representatives of the peoplethe supposed servants of
the
peopleis to recoup the illegally incurred election expenses.
The
notion of rendering service to the nation appears strange and is
alien
to their thinking. Thus, money power and criminal elements have
thoroughly
criminalized politics and have contributed to the pervasive
degeneration of standards in political and also in public life.
This is
reflected in the shoddy quality of governance and of the
governing processes.
This content downloaded from 14.139.122.40 on Sat, 6 Sep 2014
03:03:48 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
-
Sou J. Sorabjee / 85
Again, barring a few exceptions, we have legislators who
apparently answer the description given by Sri Aurobindo who
referred to the average politician in words which have striking
relevance today:
...he does not represent the soul of a people or its
aspirations. What he does usually represent is all the average
pettiness, selfishness, egoism, self-deception that is about him
and these he
represents well enough as well as a great deal of mental
incompetence, timidity and pretence. Great issues often come to
him for decision, but he does not deal with them greatly; high
words and noble ideas are on his lips, but they become rapidly the
claptrap of a Party.
In view of this state of affairs, one wonders whether what we
have is
democracy or mobocracy in action. Whatever the nomenclature,
this
makes a mockery of democracy and leads people to conclude
that
democracy in India is a glorified myth. If democracy is to be
made a reality, the cleansing of public life is
absolutely imperative. A beginning should be made with the
law
relating to defections which cries out for an urgent change.
Defection
is the worst form of political immorality. A defector commits a
breach
of faith with the electorate. Defection in any form must not
be
countenanced nor permitted, be it by a merger of political
parties or
other stratagems. A defector should be debarred from holding any
ministerial post or any public office, thereby removing a strong
incentive for defection. Moreover, the question of disqualification
of
a member on account of his alleged defection should not be
decided
by the Speaker. My personal experience has shown that Speakers
of
some State Assemblies do not display the requisite impartiality
and
independence expected of them.
Let me give you an amusing example. I was briefed in a
matter
where the issue involved was the disqualification of a member
on
account of his joining another political party. During the
conference I
enquired about the various persons in my chambers. One of
them
turned out to be the Speaker whose order was being questioned
before
the Court. I asked him, 'Mr. Speaker, why are you here in
the
conference?' He replied with gusto, 'Sir, I am on the Chief
Minister's
side, am on your side.' I had to politely but firmly tell him,
'Mr.
Speaker, you are not supposed to be on the side of anyone.' I
whispered to my instructing advocate, Praveen Parekh, in Gujarati
that he may ask the Speaker to leave my chambers, which he did. The
Speaker
This content downloaded from 14.139.122.40 on Sat, 6 Sep 2014
03:03:48 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
-
86 / India International Centre Quarterly
was furious and complained to the Chief Minister that 'Sorabjee
insulted me and did not take my assistance in the matter.' So
much
for his independence and impartiality! I believe that the
convention that a person on being elected as a
Speaker should sever his political ties with the party to which
he
previously belonged should be made a legal requirement. Besides,
in
view of the experience of the working of the tenth Schedule in
the
Constitution, which deals with defections, an amendment is
necessary to provide that the power to decide questions of
disqualification on
the ground of defection, should be entrusted to the Election
Commission instead of the Chairman or Speaker of the House
concerned as at present. That was one of the recommendations of
the
NCWRC. It has been ignored once more.
II
I
now turn to the lack of representational legitimacy. The
multiplicity of political parties, combined with our
Westminster
model based on the first-past-the-post system results in a
majority of legislators getting elected on a minority vote. They
usually win by
obtaining less than 50 per cent of the votes cast, that is, with
more
votes cast against them than in their favour. There are states
where 85
per cent to 90 per cent of the legislators have won on a
minority vote.
At the national level, in the last three Lok Sabha elections,
the
proportion of MPs who have won on a minority vote is over 67 per
cent on an average. In extreme cases, some candidates have won
even
on the basis of 13 per cent of the votes polled. Thus Parliament
and
the state legislatures, owing to the inherent weaknesses of the
first
past-the-post electoral system, have not acquired a true
representative character. The thirteenth Lok Sabha represented only
27.9 per cent of
the total electorate. This low representative character of
the
legislatures, even after more than fifty years of independence,
casts
serious doubt about the reality of democracy. Another serious
problem in the functioning of democracy is voter
apathy owing to a deep disenchantment with the working of
the
institutions of democracy. People seem almost to have resigned
to
what they consider their inevitable fate. This attitude of
fatalism
coupled with cynicism is detrimental to democracy, and is also
partly
responsible for the fact that corrupt and undesirable persons
get elected
This content downloaded from 14.139.122.40 on Sat, 6 Sep 2014
03:03:48 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
-
SOU J. SORABJEE / 87
and rule us and the future generations. The right to vote, of
making the little cross on the little bit of paper is a precious
right and must be exercised with a full sense of responsibility.
Votes should not be cast on the basis of the religion or caste or
lineage of the candidate, but on his or her individual merit.
Casting votes for candidates with a
colourful criminal record is a sacrilege, an affront to honest
law-abiding
people. Indeed, it is the citizens' ethical obligation to reject
such
candidates.
It is forgotten that a citizen's obligation in a democracy is
not
discharged by the exercise of franchise once in five years and
thereafter
retiring in passivity and not taking any interest in the working
of the
government and enforcing its accountability. Accountability is
to be
enforced not merely at the time of elections, but during the
life of the
government in power. Otherwise, democracy becomes merely a
ritualistic exercise in voting and not a continuous process
of
government by the people. M.N. Roy believed that to make
democracy effective, people should exercise this right not
periodically, but from
day to day. This is a rather tall order. However, what Roy
wanted to
emphasize was that an alert and active citizenry is essential to
ensure
the successful functioning of participatory democracy and making
it
a reality. I would be presenting a lop-sided picture if I did
not mention
some positive developments, one of which is the widening of
the
democratic base with the formation of elected panchayati raj
institutions. Another significant feature is that representation in
the
legislatures has become more egalitarian. The composition of
Parliament and the state legislatures, in terms of the width of
social
representation is moving in the right direction. The
seventy-third and
seventy-fourth amendments to the Constitution ensuring the
reservation of one-third of seats for women in elections to
village panchayats and municipalities have provided a welcome
impetus to
democracy. The recent entry in Parliament of young, intelligent
and
dedicated persons is another encouraging development. The most
heartening feature is the willingness to abide by the
electoral verdict after a free and fair election. No government
in India
has hung on to power after the electorate has rejected it. There
has
been an orderly succession after every electoral verdict. This
is a vital
distinctive feature of democracy which distinguishes it from
a
dictatorship.
This content downloaded from 14.139.122.40 on Sat, 6 Sep 2014
03:03:48 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
-
88 / India International Centre Quarterly
Our founding fathers were aware of the vast disparities in
wealth
and income of our people. Their anxiety that the operation of
the
economic system does not result in the concentration of wealth
is
reflected in Directive Principle 39(c) of the Constitution,
namely, 'that
the operation of the economic system does not result in the
concentration of wealth and means of production to the
common
detriment'. While winding up the debate in the Constituent
Assembly on 25 November 1949, before the Constitution was finally
adopted, Dr. Ambedkar pointed out the perils of what he described
as a life of
contradictions in these memorable words:
On 26th January, 1950, we are going to enter into a life of
contradictions. In politics we will have equality and in social and
economic life we will have inequality. In politics we will be
recognising the principle of one man one vote and one vote one
value. In our social and economic life, we shall by reason of our
social and economic structure, continue to deny the principle of
one man one value. How long shall we continue to deny equality in
our social and economic life? If we continue to deny it for long,
we will do so only by putting our political democracy in peril. We
must remove this contradiction at the earliest possible moment else
those who suffer from inequality will blow up the structure of
democracy which this Constituent Assembly has so laboriously built
up.
Wide disparities in wealth and income persist, nay have
increased, and may be accentuated in the wake of unregulated
globalization. The anguished question posed by Dr. Ambedkar
continues to haunt us. His warning has been ignored. How long
shall
we dither in getting rid of this life of contradictions?
In an article published in July 1974 in the Radical Humanist,
Tarkunde advocated the 'adoption of income policies and
taxation
laws which would contain disparities of income and wealth
within
comparatively narrow limits'. It was his strong belief that
'equality
requires that "fair shares" in the national product should be
available
to all and that excessive disparities of income and wealth
should be
prevented' [emphasis added].
Regrettably, the sordid phenomenon of the concentration of
wealth in the hands of a few families and industrial houses
whilst the
majority of our people can hardly eke out a decent existence
still
persists. Motor cars like the Lamborghini and Rolls Royce, each
valued
at between Rs. 2 and 4 crores, have been imported and have
been
This content downloaded from 14.139.122.40 on Sat, 6 Sep 2014
03:03:48 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
-
Soli J. Sorabjee / 89
rapidly picked up by some persons overflowing with unbounded
wealth. I do not resent their wealth, but am distressed that
thanks to
the hideous working of our system the common person cannot
afford
to buy and possess even an auto. We are witness to the
disgusting
spectacle of lakhs of rupees being spent by some plutocrats on
social
occasions like weddings with pomp and splendour in sharp
contrast
to the conditions of the majority of the people living across
the street
in dingy dwellings and in unhealthy surroundings. Is this
democracy or plutocracy? Why, then, are we surprised that Naxalites
are gaining
ground? I am surprised that there are not more Naxalites when
we
have provided a fertile soil for their proliferation. At the end
of fifty years, despite the growth record, the backlog
of poverty in our country is enormous and human deprivations
are
immense. We must remember that poverty is a potent violator
of
human rights. To many the taste of democracy is bitter because
its
fullness is denied to them. 'We can have democracy or we can
have
concentration of wealth in the hands of a few. We cannot have
both.'
This was not said by a die-hard Marxist, but the great American
judge and jurist, Louis Brandeis. Securing economic and social
justice is a
moral imperative for any democracy. Failure to do so results
in
disillusionment with democracy and leads to emergence and
ultimate
acceptance of authoritarian regimes. Social justice, which is
reflected
in the Preamble to our Constitution, and is the signature tune
of our
Constitution, is still a distant dream. And without social
justice
democracy cannot be a reality: it is a fashionable myth.
Ill
I
would now like to address another feature of our democratic
polity. In one of his essays, Arthur M. Schlesinger Jr. has
pointed out theiperils of hero worship: namely, the surrender of
decision,
the unquestioning submission to leadership, the prostration of
the
average person before the Great Man or Woman and how these
are
fatal to human dignity. Roy, too, deprecated the cult of hero
worship which is endemic in our country, and where the personality
cult is
ever flourishing. There is nothing wrong in admiring our leaders
as
heroes and heroines. However, the risk is that in the process
there is a
tendency to entrust such persons with vast powers and
uncritically
This content downloaded from 14.139.122.40 on Sat, 6 Sep 2014
03:03:48 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
-
90 / India International Centre Quarterly
accept the exercise of these powers by them without insisting
on
accountability. Dr. Ambedkar was aware of these lurking dangers.
In the
Constituent Assembly he underlined the importance of observing
the
caution which John Stuart Mill had uttered to all who are
interested
in the maintenance of democracy, namely, 'not to lay their
liberties at
the feet of even a great man, or to trust him with powers which
enable
him to subvert their institutions'. There is nothing wrong in
being
grateful to great leaders who have rendered life-long services
to the
country. But there are limits to gratitude. As has been well
said by the
Irish patriot Daniel O'Connell, 'No man can be grateful at the
cost of
his honour, no woman can be grateful at the cost of her chastity
and
no nation can be grateful at the cost of its liberty.' Dr.
Ambedkar
emphasized that this caution is far more necessary in the case
of India
than in the case of any other country because:
... in India, Bhakti or what may be called the path of devotion
or hero worship, plays a part in its politics unequalled in
magnitude, by the part it plays in the politics of any other
country in the world. Bhakti in religion may be a road to the
salvation of the soul. But in
politics, Bhakti or hero worship is a sure road to degradation
and to eventual dictatorship.
These words have a prophetic ring. We did not heed them to
our
cost and had to suffer the imposition of the spurious June
1975
emergency which was foisted on the country by a powerful
charismatic
leader. The slogan 'India is Indira and Indira is India' was
chanted ad
nauseam in the sycophantic hero worship of the leader. We paid
the
price. Democracy suffered a temporary demise in our country
from
June 1975 till March 1977 when it was restored. We must be on
our
guard that this phenomenon, which is fatal to human dignity
and
eventually leads to dictatorship, does not recur. We have had
enough of dynastic rule.
In one of his writings Tarkunde perceptively pointed out
that:
...the reason why authoritarianism appears to be always round
the corner in India is that the majority of the people in the
country continue to hanker for a saviour who will lift them from
the mire of poverty and provide them with the means for a decent
human existence. The attitude they have in politics is similar to
the attitude
they have in religious affairs. It is not an accident that there
are numerous holy pretenders in India with large followings.
This content downloaded from 14.139.122.40 on Sat, 6 Sep 2014
03:03:48 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
-
Soli J. Sorabjee/ 91
Democracy has wider moral implications than mere
majoritarianism. A crude statistical view of democracy gives
a
distorted picture. A real democracy is one in which the exercise
of the
power of the many is conditional on respect for the rights of
the few
and especially of the minorities. Pluralism is the soul of
democracy. The right to dissent is the hallmark of a democracy,
indeed its
very essence. In a real democracy the dissenter must feel at
home and
ought not to be nervously looking over his shoulder fearing
captivity or bodily harm, or economic and social sanctions for
his
unconventional or critical views. There should be freedom to
express the thought we hate. Freedom of speech has no meaning if
there is no
freedom after speech. The reality of democracy is to be measured
by the extent of freedom and accommodation it extends, in the words
of
our Supreme Court in its celebrated decision in S.
Rangarajan:
.. .not merely to ideas that are accepted but those that offend,
shock or disturb the State or any sector of the population because
such are the demands of the pluralism, tolerance and
broadmindedness without which there is no democratic society.
In my opinion, of all the threats to our democracy the gravest
is
the rise of fanaticism and intolerance all round, which has
assumed
menacing proportions. In a free democratic society tolerance is
vital
especially in large and complex societies comprising people
with
varied beliefs and interests. An intolerant society does not
brook
dissent. An authoritarian regime cannot tolerate the expression
of ideas
which challenge its doctrines and ideology in the form of
writings,
plays, music or paintings. Intolerance is utterly incompatible
with
democratic values.
The rise of intolerance all round is alarming. It is not
confined to
any particular political party or group or sect. Any criticism
of Madame
Sonia Gandhi and her style of functioning by any Congress person
is
visited with unpleasant consequences. You will recall that
Sharad
Pawar and Sangma, when they were members of the Congress party,
had proposed that a person of non-Indian origin should be
ineligible to hold high offices under our Constitution including
that of the prime minister. The proposal was obviously designed to
preclude Sonia
Gandhi from becoming the prime minister of India. This led to
a
frightening outburst of anger in the Congress. Effigies of Pawar
and
Sangma were burnt, and if they had attended the Congress
Working
This content downloaded from 14.139.122.40 on Sat, 6 Sep 2014
03:03:48 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
-
92 / India International Centre Quarterly
Committee, which was to be held at that time, they would have
been
lynched. No one can criticize the supremo, Bal Thackeray,
without
incurring the wrath of the Shiv Sainiks. It is depressing that
we have reached a stage where even the moderate expression of a
different
point of view is met with hostility. Of late, there have been
vociferous demands for bans. The banning itch has become
infectious. Sikhs are
offended by certain words in the title of a film; Christians
want the film Da Vinci Code banned because they find it hurtful. No
one dare write an authentic and critical biography of a revered
religious or
political leader. The American author, Laine, who wrote a
biography of Shivaji in which there were unpalatable remarks about
Shivaji was
sought to be prosecuted, and there was a ridiculous demand for
his extradition. Worse, the prestigious Bhandarkar Institute at
Pune where Laine had worked and done some research was vandalized
by bigots and invaluable manuscripts were destroyed. This was
fascism at its worst and a fatal blow to our democracy. The Taliban
was emulated.
Take the recent instance of intolerance displayed towards the
actor Aamir Khan. One may disagree with his views or his lending
support to the Narmada Bachao Aandolan movement and criticize him
severely. However, to burn his posters and to prohibit the
screening of his films and subject him in Gujarat to social and
economic sanctions is the height of intolerance. This attitude is
totally antithetical to our Indian psyche and tradition. Our
Supreme Court, speaking through Justice Chinnappa Reddy in the
Jehova's Witnesses' case, has rightly reminded us that: 'Our
tradition teaches tolerance; our
philosophy preaches tolerance; our Constitution practises
tolerance. Let none dilute it.'
It must be realized that intolerance has a chilling, inhibiting
effect on freedom of thought and discussion. In the absence of
tolerance,
healthy and vigorous debate and frank discussion are no longer
possible. The consequence is that dissent dries up; when that
happens democracy loses its essence and reality. There is an urgent
need to combat intolerance and the deadly threat it poses to the
democratic fabric of our nation with all our might. The practice of
tolerance in our multireligious, multicultural nation must be
regarded as a fundamental duty of every citizen, and must be
actively encouraged and performed if we are to make our pluralist
democracy a living, robust reality.
This content downloaded from 14.139.122.40 on Sat, 6 Sep 2014
03:03:48 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
-
Soli J. Sorabjee / 93
IV
The
collapse of the criminal justice system is a tragic indisputable
fact. The judicial system has not been able to meet even the
modest expectations of the society. Its delays and costs are
frustrating, its processes slow and uncertain. People are pushed
to
seek recourse to extra-legal methods for relief. Trial systems,
both on
the civil and criminal side, have broken down. Access to justice
is not
a reality; it has become a cruel slogan. After this dismal
picture, it may well be concluded that
democracy has withered away in our country and there can be only
one answer to the question posed in the title of this talk.
However, that is not so because even though the firmament is dark
and
depressing, there are rays of hope, there is a silver lining.
There is no
dearth of criticism, at times virulent, and often ill-informed
about our
judiciary. Yet, paradoxically, it is the institution of an
independent
judiciary which has prevented the collapse of democracy and made
it
a reality. It has done so by steadfastly upholding the Rule of
Law
which sustains democracy. Accountability is the sine qua non
of
democracy. Our judiciary has enforced the accountability of
the
holders and wielders of power on several occasions. It has acted
on
the dictum that 'however high you may be the law is above you'
and
has done so irrespective of the status of any person or
authority.
Recently, a minister in the Maharashtra Cabinet was sentenced to
one
month's imprisonment for committing a breach of a Supreme Court
order passed for protection of environment.
Another judicial contribution is the development of Public
Interest Litigation (PIL). The occasional aberrations and abuse
of PIL
should not blind us to the fact that, thanks to PIL, numerous
under
trial prisoners languishing in jails for inordinately long
periods have
been released; persons treated like serfs and held in bondage
have
secured their freedom and have been rehabilitated; inmates of
care
homes and mental asylums have been restored their humanity;
and
the condition of workers in stone quarries and young children
working in hazardous occupations has undergone a humanizing change.
Women who are the victims of sexual harassment have secured
relief.
Juristic activism in the arena of environmental and ecological
issues
and accountability in the use of hazardous technology has been
made
possible and has yielded salutary results. Fundamental rights
have
become living realities, to some extent, for at least some
indigent,
This content downloaded from 14.139.122.40 on Sat, 6 Sep 2014
03:03:48 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
-
94 / India International Centre Quarterly
disadvantaged and exploited segments of Indian humanity. The
most
heartening feature is that courts have started taking human
suffering
seriously and are responding to it with sensitivity. A free and
independent press also enforces accountability by
exposing malfeasance and lapses in administration and thus
functions
as an instrument of democratic control by enabling citizens to
call
upon their rulers to account for their actions. Furthermore, the
press
gives voice to the voiceless, hope to the hopeless and the
exploited
segments of our society whose plight is unknown till the press
brings it to our notice.
No doubt the press acts irresponsibly at times, indulges in
sensationalism and unjustifiably violates the privacy of
individuals.
Yet, no human institution is perfect. Demands for stringent
restrictions
on the press are unwarranted. In the words of Madison: 'It is
better to
leave a few of its noxious branches to their luxuriant growth,
than, by
pruning them away, injure the vigour of those yielding the
proper fruits.'
It is my firm belief that, but for an independent judiciary and
a
free press, democracy would have disappeared from our midst
long
ago. What makes our democracy a reality is the adherence to the
Rule
of Law by our judiciary, and the enforcement of accountability
of the
wielders of power by the judiciary and a free press. It is these
institutions which have given strength to our democracy and
sustained it. It should be our endeavour to strengthen these
institutions and
remove anomalies and shortcomings, if any, in their functioning
rather
than weaken these institutions.
V
The
real problem, the deep malaise lies in the fact that there is
a
collapse of values in public life. Unfortunately, we live in
times
when there are no men and women to match our Himalayan
peaks, when our political system has more criminals, fixers
and
hypocrites per capita than at any time in our history. There is
a crisis
of confidence. There is a crisis of leadership. The foremost
requirement is the restoration of confidence in the institutions of
democracy. This
needs a strong and enlightened national leadership that is able
to cope with emergent problems boldly and decisively.
This content downloaded from 14.139.122.40 on Sat, 6 Sep 2014
03:03:48 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
-
Sou J. Sorabjee / 95
Let us not forget the elementary truth that the effectiveness
of
democracy rests not only upon knowledge and judgment, but upon
character, a commodity in short supply Louis Brandeis rightly
reminds
us that 'democracy in any sphere is a serious undertaking. It is
more
difficult to maintain than to achieve. ... Success in any
democratic
undertaking must proceed from the individual'. It is only the
morally mature and sensitive individual who will be determined to
do away with slums, eliminate the ever-growing cancer of corruption
and help lift the load from the poverty stricken. The prime need is
to bring about a revolution in the mindset of the people. We need
persons whom Roy calls 'detached individuals; spiritually free
individuals'.
We need in our public life persons like Tarkunde who did not
hanker after fame and fortune. His top-most priorities were the
welfare
of the nation and the protection of the human rights of our
people and, in particular, the rights of the minorities. He was
keen that
minorities enjoyed the full plenitude of the fundamental
rights
guaranteed to them under our Constitution and that they should
not
labour under any feeling of insecurity and discrimination.
He
possessed in abundant measure that rare and lovely virtuecourage
which was visibly displayed during the dark days of the Emergency
when many lawyers were reluctant, or afraid, to take up cases of
the
victims of illegal detentions under MISA. I can only lament with
the
poet Wordsworth and say: Tarkunde, 'thou shouldst have been
living at this hour, the Nation hath need of thee'. I shall always
remember
my close association with him during that time, and also his
advice
and guidance. It was his persuasion to which I yielded and
accepted the offer of the post of the Attorney General for India in
1998, which I
had previously declined. Tarkunde was always toiling tirelessly
day and night for the dissemination of humanist values of freedom,
rationalism and secular morality. When I think of Tarkunde, I
am
reminded of the verse:
The heights of great men reached and kept, Were not attained by
sudden flight, But they, while their companions slept, Were toiling
upwards in the night.
Friends, after 56 years the lofty aims and aspirations and
the
pledges of our Founding Fathers have not been fulfilled. Yet
there is
no room for despondency or fatalism. Let us resolve today to
redeem
the unfulfilled pledges of our Founding Fathers. I know that
this may
This content downloaded from 14.139.122.40 on Sat, 6 Sep 2014
03:03:48 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
-
96 / India International Centre Quarterly
appear Utopian and that the task is stupendous. But the stakes
too are
stupendous: the survival of democracy in our land. Therefore in
the Tarkunde spirit let us undertake cheerfully and undaunted the
journey on that bumpy and difficult road with miles to go, always
remembering that we have promises and pledges to keep before we
go to sleep.
This content downloaded from 14.139.122.40 on Sat, 6 Sep 2014
03:03:48 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Article Contentsp. [83]p. 84p. 85p. 86p. 87p. 88p. 89p. 90p.
91p. 92p. 93p. 94p. 95p. 96
Issue Table of ContentsIndia International Centre Quarterly,
Vol. 33, No. 2 (AUTUMN 2006), pp. 1-180Front MatterEDITORIALLinking
Histories: the planning of New Delhi [pp. 1-12]Enshrining an
Imperial Tradition [pp. 13-26]Imperial Delhi: imagined, imaged,
iconicized [pp. 27-37]Photo EssayThe Authorised Version [pp.
38-56]
INTERVIEWA Nice Man to Know [pp. 57-74]
All the Teachings [pp. 75-82]Indian Democracy: reality or myth?
[pp. 83-96]Making Truth Powerful [pp. 97-107]Climate Change and
Global Warming [pp. 108-114]Primary Education and the Law [pp.
115-124]Court to Academy: Karnatik music [pp. 125-138]INTERVIEWA
Blessed Life [pp. 139-156]
BOOK REVIEWSHow Much is Enough? [pp. 157-160]The New American
Empire? [pp. 161-163]Plaiting Patterns [pp. 164-170]Great
Expectations [pp. 171-174]How Green is My Delhi? [pp. 175-177]
Back Matter