Let’s not pretend..

 The social, civil and political situation in our Bharat is getting out of control on an almost daily basis. Enemies within our country are putting in every effort to destabilize our democratically elected government and with the help of anti-national and foreign elements are plotting to weaken our Nation.

Let’s not pretend that everything in our country is manageable and that the government is in full control. Over the last couple of years we have experienced the growing hold of the Leftists cabal over our society. The activities at Shahin Baug were the first coordinated efforts of radical Islamic elements who teamed-up with the leftists to protest the legally enacted laws of our country; laws that were debated and accepted by the majority of our Parliamentarians, the elected representatives of the people. A few hundred people squatted on public roads in an attempt to force an elected government to retract laws that are enacted for the protection of hundred and twenty-five million citizens. Same is the case of the ongoing farmers protests that have paralyzed the outskirts of Delhi. In both these cases it is clear that there were political agendas to create unrest among the people, with a focus on attempting to win political advantages on an anti-government platform.

The weakness of our government was first seen during the unlawful activities at Shaheen Baug. The government had every right under the Constitution to end this protest with strict implementation of existing laws, but they allowed the situation to deteriorate till it completely undermined law and order.  The same is being repeated in the farmers protest activities. In fact, this activity should not be called the farmers protest, but rather the Punjab landowners militancy against the Parliament of India. The violence unleashed by these militants was on full display on Republic Day 2021 and yet the government in power failed to respond with a strict enforcement of law and order. Police personnel were attacked with swords and steel rods and many were grievously injured; and the incompetence of the Minister in-charge of law enforcement was found to be vast and immeasurable.

Let’s not pretend that the Leftists are an irritant and not dangerous to our society. Leftists across the world are united by a single philosophy, a single purpose, a single agenda and global finance. They work towards creating instability in democratic countries because that’s the only society where they can violently push their agenda under the democratic values of freedom for all. Conversely, patriots and nationalists, who are branded as conservative and right-wing have different outlooks based on their own country’s needs for a strong and united social and civil structure. Leftists are spread across politics, media and in non-government organizations. Their philosophy appeals to the frustrated masses who identity is defined by the lowest common denominator of hatred towards all those who are hard-working, honest, law-abiding and supportive of democratic institutions.

Let’s not pretend that we can appease these anti-national elements, both inside our country and abroad. The Leftists use their large amounts of finance, accumulated through donations from communist countries like China and Islamic countries of Saudi Arabia and Qatar who have a history of sponsoring terrorism and anti-democratic movements. Instead of challenging the leadership of these countries on their actions, our government keeps building bridges of commerce and cultural interactions with them. Appeasement does not eliminate the danger, it only makes the dangerous more bolder.

Let’s not pretend that we are a thriving democracy because our leaders tell us so. Thirty percent of our population is still deprived from literacy, 6.7% of our population is below the official poverty limit and those people who live in absolute poverty are unknown. 440 of the 536 Members of Parliament (approx 82%)  elected in the 2019 election are multi-millionaires, while the average daily wage of the majority of our citizens is Rs. 356.30 per day (Rs. 126,842.80 per year) in 2020. Approximately 1.77 million residents of India are homeless and have no access to safe drinking water, adequate food or basic medical care.  

Let’s not pretend that we will remain a thriving and vibrant democracy when the average age of our Parliamentarians is 54 years and that of our Cabinet ministers is 60; in a country where 65% of the population is below 35. Unless the age gap between the political leadership and the majority population is reduced drastically, our nation is in no position to advance or stride ahead to its full potential.

Let’s not pretend that western countries or their businesses are friends of ours or have sympathy for our problems. NGOs from USA and UK sponsor activities that are against our country. The British parliamentarians did not hesitate to discuss events which are the internal issues of India, as if they are still the masters of a colony. The current Canadian Prime Minister has no hesitation in showing support to Khalistanis supporters in an effort to consolidate his vote-bank and many members of the United States Congress pass resolutions that blatantly interfere in the internal affairs of our sovereign nation. They are well aware that the rise of our nation will lead to loss of influence of their own nations.

And finally, let’s not pretend that our government of elders is in any position to control the rising power of technology. Social media platforms routinely and brazenly violate the freedom of expression of our patriots while encouraging leftists extremism. They do not consider themselves answerable to democratic governments and continue their anti-India activities without restrictions. Their lawless behavior is a reflection of our weak government and not of the power of their technology.

Our tech-savvy younger generation, united by their disappointment in traditional banking; with its slow and inefficient work culture, repeated verification of documents for opening accounts and transferring funds, and the realization that the cosy and symbiotic relationships between banks, businesses and government agencies is leading to unsustainable losses of the exchequer; is turning to crypto currency like Bitcoins to conduct transactions. They are in parts protesting against the governments monopoly on money, the restrictive rules and regulations that favor the powerful and what they deem are unfair taxes. Essentially, they are disrupting the conventional and rigid framework of traditional banking with what they believe is a monetary revolution.

Let’s not pretend that we are in a stable and secure society because we are actually in a middle of a violent storm of circumstances that are fast moving out of control of our law-abiding, tax-paying citizens and into the hands of our enemies.

Let’s not pretend anymore.

 

Who am I?

 Born in this land called India, also called as Bharat, but referred to by our Islamic neighbors as Hindustan; who exactly am I? What is my identity? Where lies my purpose? What are my responsibilities and most importantly, where are my priorities supposed to connect with those of others from my own land?

 The lack of this defined identity is one of the most predominant cause of unrest and divisive character of our country. A country can never be classified as a Nation, unless the people believe in a shared common identity. Unity does not lie in diversity; unity lies in shared values, shared responsibilities and a shared vision for a nation and its future.

Historians have offered various theories as to the origin of the name Bharat for our country. According to one version, the Rig Veda’s 18^th hymn of the 7^th book describes a vicious war known as “Dasharajna” or battle of ten kings; where ten of the most powerful tribal kings of those times fought against King Sudasa of the Bharata tribe of Trtsu dynasty. Sudasa was victorious in this battle and in honor of this victory, the people of this region started to identify themselves as member of the Bharata tribe and the land was named Bharat Varsha, meaning the land of Bharata. In another version, according to the Mahabharata, our land was named Bharatvarsha after the legendary emperor Bharata Chakravarti; who was the founder of Bharata dynasty and the ancestor of the Pandavas and the Kauravas; who fought against each other in the battle of Kurukshetra for the throne of Hastinapur, also known as the Mahabharata battle.

The term ‘India’ has evolved from the Greek Ἰνδία to Latin India as known in the old English (5^th - 12^th century AD).

The origins of the name ‘Hindu’ is said to have derived from the river Sindhu, the name of the Indus river as mentioned in the Rig-Veda, somewhere around 1700 - 1100 BC. The neighboring Arabs and Persians who uttered the alphabet ‘s’ as ‘h’, called the land as Hindu which then morphed into Hindustan - the land of Hindu.

 Mahmud of Gazni invaded Hindustan around 1001 and started the process of six hundred years of Islamic rule over majority of the country, which was challenged successfully by the Maratha Empire that formally existed with the coronation of Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj in 1674 and ended in 1818 with the defeat of Peshwa Bajirao the 2^nd at the hands of the British East India company. In 1858, the governance was transferred to the British Crown and India became a colony of the Britain till 1947, when it gained independence.

 The Constitution of India, as presented to the people of India by Dr. Bhimrao ‘Babasaheb’ Ambedkar was exclusively a document for the People’s Rights and Freedom, and defined the identity of the country as “a shared race, culture and language (that) may provide the basis for a patriotism that was particularly Indian … For nationality to exist there needed to be more than a common race, language or culture. There needed to be a “spiritual essence,” a tie of kinship. Above all, it required “the will to live as a nation” (Ambedkar 1946: 39)”. It can be interpreted that according to Dr. Ambedkar, the identity of our Nation would be a “social feeling” that imbibed a sentiment of fellowship and superseded class and caste differences. 

Contrary to his opinion, today we are a nation divided along religion, regionalism, caste, creed and financial inequality. Socialism as a political tool has been the main pillar of all political parties, but in reality the mix economy of free-market and socialism has given rise to lack of rational calculation of costs of development, bureaucratic inefficiency and deep rooted state corruption at all levels of governance due to the concentration of power in the hands of government officials; with limited freedom to entrepreneurs and free-market customers.

This has led to pre-millennial, millennial and GenZ generations of our country to live under the restrictions of aspirations that cannot be met, being victims to distorted thinking about the historical past, myths about governmental successes; all which lead to bad attitudes, poor civil and social habits, lack of self-care, various addictions and lack of balance in life. This further leads to a lack of a clear sense of meaning, purpose and direction in life, with no clear idea of who they are and what they should achieve in life. Without proper guidance, sufficient support from all parts of society, and clear perspectives; they lack the required skills and insights to develop effective strategies in life and sustainable action plans to implement changes in their outlook and daily activities to achieve successful goals.

In order to overcome many of the issues that are creating social and civil unrest in our country and its effect of the deteriorating law and order implementation; its the responsibility of our elected representatives to define our country by one single name - which will be its identity. Once the name has been chosen and made permanent. Governmental ideology cannot be a mix of socialism and free-market. It has to be one or the other, for a clear definition for effective long term strategies. People make up the society that makes up a Nation. If the guidelines stated by Dr. Ambedkar are followed, it would mean that class, caste and religious differences have to be overcome. This can happen by officially identifying our people only by name, age, gender and skill-sets; and replacing cronyism with meritocracy. Cronyism via religion, caste, creed, political affiliations and financial bonding exists as fact of life, rather than an exception. This is one of the prime reasons for constant civil unrest; the others being unfulfilled political promises, differentiation in economic opportunities, institutional ignoring of merit in favor of vote-bank politics, and the lack of effective implementation of law and order which, when reinforced by an inefficient and at times incompetent judiciary leads to a constant social frustration among the majority.

Technology is assisting our current generations to overcome many issues, but the dependence of technology means an higher distrust of the government, its policies and its leaders. Our country is fractured from the inside and unless there are decisive changes that positively impact the majority of our citizens, a looming Constitutional disaster should not be a surprise to anyone.

 

 

 

 

 

     

Referendum - The Citizens Voice

 A referendum is a vote by the citizens of a country to approve or reject any proposal by their government; and the result of a referendum can support or oppose such proposals. It is similar to casting a vote in an election, except that in a referendum, the citizens have the option of writing ‘yes’ or ‘no’ in the opinion box of the proposals. During the referendum exercise the government may put before its citizens one or more proposals for consideration.

 It can be argued that referendums play a constructive role in an democracy due to its deliberative role, and helps to focus the nation on events that affect every-day life decisions. It can be further argued that nation-wide deliberative processes work better when they are focused on collective decision-making between the government and the citizens.

 Critics can counter-argue that influential politicians can misuse the process for agenda manipulation, yes-or-no questions instead of bilateral dialogue, brute strength of majority politics to extract a favorable decision; et.al. Therefore, it’s necessary to consider referendum as one part of the democratic process and not the system as a whole. To become ‘as democratic as systematically possible’ it needs to be connected to the demands, narratives, claims, deliberations and experiences at one end, and to the Constitutional framework on the other; to ensure a high standard of democratic decisiveness. Basically, it cannot be exclusively the “Citizen’s Will” unless it fits into the accepted parameters of the Constitution of the Nation. However, the process must result in a direct political consequences, supported by policy, adequate allocation of resources and legal enforcement. Only then, can the process be termed as a democratic exercise of the citizen’s policy mandate.

 In India, the issue of conducting referendums has been intensely debated since independence from British Rule. There has been a belief that conducting referendums is not permitted in India, since the Constitution has no provision for it and because the Constituent Assembly which ratified the Constitution of India believed that; since elected parliamentarians would truly represent the ‘will of the people’, there was no need for a separate process of referendums. However, in later years, there have been instances when referendums have indeed been conducted in our nation.

 In 1948, a referendum was conducted in the princely State of Junaghad, where the citizens voted to accede to the Republic of India [Refer: 1959 AIR 1383, 1960 SCR (1) 537]. Similarly, in 1949, a referendum was conducted in Chandernagore (now part of the Hooghly district in Bengal), which was at that time a French territory; whereby the citizens voted in favor of merging with the Republic of India rather than stay as a free territory controlled by France. Subsequently, the administration of Chandernagore was transferred to India. [Refer: AIR 1960 SC 845, 1960 3 SCR 250]; and also in Pondicherry ( now named Puducherry, a former French territory) where citizens voted to join the Indian Union in 1954. 

The last referendum happened in 1975, wherein the inhabitants of Sikkim decided on their merger with India [Anjan Banerjee v. Union of India, Civil Order No. 8509(W) Of 1992 | 29-03-1993]. It should be noted that while the Constitution does not allow for referendums, the tribal areas in the states of Assam, Meghalaya, Tripura and Mizoram, recognised under the Sixth Schedule have incorporated provisions allowing referendums in election matters. [Refer: The United Khasi Jaintia Hills Autonomous District (Appointment and Succession of Chief and Headman) Act, 1959].

The Constitution of India does not contain any references to a referendum, therefore it can be assumed that while referendums are not encouraged, they are also not totally prohibited. In the landmark case of ‘Kesavananda Bharti v. State of Kerala (1973)’ [Writ Petition (civil) 135 of 1970], the Supreme Court laid down the “Basic Structure Doctrine” according to which certain basic features of the Constitution could not be taken away by the Parliament, under its amending powers. In this very case, Justice S.N. Dwivedi had remarked that in India there can be no law for a referendum, as the exclusive procedure for amending the Constitution is Article 368.  

 However, since governments in the past have conducted referendums, the same is possible now and in the future, to ascertain the will of the people towards major policy decisions or possible amendments to such decisions. It is important to note that the current government of Prime Minister Narendra Modi, in its submission to the Supreme Court in November 2020 on the issue of a referendum to ascertain the views of the citizens, as to whether a new Parliament building should be constructed; stated that “We are not a participative democracy. Fortunately, we are a representative democracy. You cannot seek a referendum. Objections (to environment impact) have been made to the CPWD. These have been considered. Participative democracy is a Utopian idea,” [Solicitor General Tushar Mehta to a three-judge bench led by Justice AM Khanwilkar].  

A country as diverse as India needs to hold referendums, in order to have a two-way consistent dialogue between the Government and the People who appointed it into power. While, political parties like to argue that frequent elections act as a platform for citizens to express their views, and that an election can also be considered as a referendum on the basis of agenda and ideology; the converse argument is that elections do not necessarily define national policy and program implementation. Elections are won on promises and lost due to lack of performance. Sometimes, they are re-won on performance delivered; but in every circumstance the citizens have to gamble five years or more of their lives without guarantee of achieving national goals.

The lack of a referendum policy carry’s the risk of stifling the voices of those who are marginalized due to various reasons, across various sections of society. Governments seem to be averse to referendums which carry the inherent risks of refusal of the governments proposals, and because even the Supreme Court would be hesitant to overturn the results of the process, knowing that the opinion of the citizens is supreme. The question that should concern us all is that; had the government of Prime Minister Modi conducted referendums on the Citizens Amendment Act (CAA), National Registry of Citizens (NRC) and the three Farm Bills 2020; would the government have been in a better position to clarify the doubts raised by those opposed to it, convince the majority, of the benefits of these laws towards the security of the nation, and more importantly; would it have prevented the violence and chaos that negatively impacted commercial activities and, law and order?

References:

1. Advocate Swapnil Tripathi / The Basic Structure Blog

2. M.N Roy’s Constitution of Free India

3. Ministry of External Affairs [MEA], Government of India.