12-17-2008, 02:20 AM
<b>We need professional governance</b>
Prafull Goradia
<b><i>Despite entrepreneurial genius, governance in India has failed on many occasions. Inducing professionalism in governance may provide the much sought impetus</i></b><!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Mumbai on 26/11 was another evidence how the Central Government once again added to the already crippled law and order situation in the country. But there had to be a whipping boy, and that was Pakistan. It is not that Pakistan is not to blame for the present crisis erupted after what happened in Mumbai but we will have to introspect, especially when India aspires to be a superpower!
Why do we not admit to ourselves that we do not yet know how to govern effectively. The Indian civilisation has enough to offer in many spheres but not a sense of governance. As Mr J Krishnamurthy said that accepting the fact of a problem is half the solution. His plea was not to indulge in escapism. So true of our ruling class! If China's miraculous progress is pointed out, our excuse is its dictatorship. Korea and Singapore are smaller states. What about the United States? Oh, that's a different continent.
<b>Ancient India allotted the task of governing to the Kshatriyas who were perhaps five to 10 per cent of the people. The rest of the castes stayed away from governance and did not experience the art and craft of ruling. When the Kshatriyas could not cope, aliens came and took over. Even the Muslim rulers lost to a new aggressor almost every time. Dynasty followed dynasty. Ibrahim Lodi with one lakh troops was defeated and killed by Babar and his 13,000 soldiers at the first Battle of Panipat. The Mughal emperors could do little in the face of Nadir Shah as well as Ahmed Shah Abdali. </b>
Defending the state borders is an integral part of governance. When the Mughals, the Marathas and the Sikhs all failed, the East India Company took over. Imagine a commercial enterprise replacing maharajas, nawabs and nizams! Coming to the economic sphere, the entire sub-continent missed the industrial revolution until the British initiated it after 1857. This is despite the entrepreneurial genius of many Indians; evidently it was a systemic failure. Is it that India is perpetually in search of professional rulers because its own people are disinclined to rule themselves?
It is neither practical nor self-respecting to look outside for professional rulers. We need to make a deliberate effort to develop our own professionals. It should be useful to take a fresh look at the system on which is based the country's governance. If we cannot reform it, we need to call for a second republic. Our first republic is based on a Constitution which has been amended 109 times or nearly twice a year since it was installed in 1950. In contrast to our 395 Articles, the US Constitution has only seven Articles and needed to be amended only 26 times in the course of 230 years. The Japanese national document written in 1945 has not been amended even once.
In the course of history other countries also had problems of governance. For example, France since 1958 is the fifth republic. The first had come into being in 1792, the second in 1850, the third in 1870 and the fourth in 1944. The present Germany is the fifth Reich since the Berlin Wall fell and its two halves were reunited. The fourth Reich was inaugurated in 1949, the third by Adolf Hitler in 1934, the second after World War I with the capital at Weimar.
<b>A second republic is recommended for India because the country needs a system which would induce professionalism in governance. At present, MPs and MLAs are elected for the primary purpose of making laws. However, soon after their election they are expected to help forming the ministry or the executive for governing the country. In turn, the executive, represented by the Law Ministry, plays a part in appointing the judges. This results in confusion of powers and the legislator's first priority becomes enjoying the fishes and loaves of executive power, preferably in becoming minister. Law making, for which he is chosen, becomes a non-priority. The laws are drafted by bureaucrats and passed by the legislatures most often in the course of a few minutes without debate. Parliament sessions are called or postponed at the convenience of the executive as it happened in the course of 2008. Many a State Assembly meets only for a few days in the year. Not infrequently, there are Assembly sessions which last for only three days. </b>
In contrast to this confusion of powers, the US Constitution is based on a separation of powers. That is, the legislators make laws; they do not participate in their execution. The executives, headed by the President for the country and the Governor for the State, are elected purely for running the executive Government. The judiciary is independent. The all round progress made by the country is a testimony to the effectiveness of its system.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Prafull Goradia
<b><i>Despite entrepreneurial genius, governance in India has failed on many occasions. Inducing professionalism in governance may provide the much sought impetus</i></b><!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Mumbai on 26/11 was another evidence how the Central Government once again added to the already crippled law and order situation in the country. But there had to be a whipping boy, and that was Pakistan. It is not that Pakistan is not to blame for the present crisis erupted after what happened in Mumbai but we will have to introspect, especially when India aspires to be a superpower!
Why do we not admit to ourselves that we do not yet know how to govern effectively. The Indian civilisation has enough to offer in many spheres but not a sense of governance. As Mr J Krishnamurthy said that accepting the fact of a problem is half the solution. His plea was not to indulge in escapism. So true of our ruling class! If China's miraculous progress is pointed out, our excuse is its dictatorship. Korea and Singapore are smaller states. What about the United States? Oh, that's a different continent.
<b>Ancient India allotted the task of governing to the Kshatriyas who were perhaps five to 10 per cent of the people. The rest of the castes stayed away from governance and did not experience the art and craft of ruling. When the Kshatriyas could not cope, aliens came and took over. Even the Muslim rulers lost to a new aggressor almost every time. Dynasty followed dynasty. Ibrahim Lodi with one lakh troops was defeated and killed by Babar and his 13,000 soldiers at the first Battle of Panipat. The Mughal emperors could do little in the face of Nadir Shah as well as Ahmed Shah Abdali. </b>
Defending the state borders is an integral part of governance. When the Mughals, the Marathas and the Sikhs all failed, the East India Company took over. Imagine a commercial enterprise replacing maharajas, nawabs and nizams! Coming to the economic sphere, the entire sub-continent missed the industrial revolution until the British initiated it after 1857. This is despite the entrepreneurial genius of many Indians; evidently it was a systemic failure. Is it that India is perpetually in search of professional rulers because its own people are disinclined to rule themselves?
It is neither practical nor self-respecting to look outside for professional rulers. We need to make a deliberate effort to develop our own professionals. It should be useful to take a fresh look at the system on which is based the country's governance. If we cannot reform it, we need to call for a second republic. Our first republic is based on a Constitution which has been amended 109 times or nearly twice a year since it was installed in 1950. In contrast to our 395 Articles, the US Constitution has only seven Articles and needed to be amended only 26 times in the course of 230 years. The Japanese national document written in 1945 has not been amended even once.
In the course of history other countries also had problems of governance. For example, France since 1958 is the fifth republic. The first had come into being in 1792, the second in 1850, the third in 1870 and the fourth in 1944. The present Germany is the fifth Reich since the Berlin Wall fell and its two halves were reunited. The fourth Reich was inaugurated in 1949, the third by Adolf Hitler in 1934, the second after World War I with the capital at Weimar.
<b>A second republic is recommended for India because the country needs a system which would induce professionalism in governance. At present, MPs and MLAs are elected for the primary purpose of making laws. However, soon after their election they are expected to help forming the ministry or the executive for governing the country. In turn, the executive, represented by the Law Ministry, plays a part in appointing the judges. This results in confusion of powers and the legislator's first priority becomes enjoying the fishes and loaves of executive power, preferably in becoming minister. Law making, for which he is chosen, becomes a non-priority. The laws are drafted by bureaucrats and passed by the legislatures most often in the course of a few minutes without debate. Parliament sessions are called or postponed at the convenience of the executive as it happened in the course of 2008. Many a State Assembly meets only for a few days in the year. Not infrequently, there are Assembly sessions which last for only three days. </b>
In contrast to this confusion of powers, the US Constitution is based on a separation of powers. That is, the legislators make laws; they do not participate in their execution. The executives, headed by the President for the country and the Governor for the State, are elected purely for running the executive Government. The judiciary is independent. The all round progress made by the country is a testimony to the effectiveness of its system.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->