09-06-2009, 09:41 AM
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Let legislators elect leaders</b>
pioneer.com
Swapan Dasgupta
The death of YS Rajasekhara Reddy in tragic circumstances has triggered a wave of mass hysteria that may well influence the Congressâs choice of his successor. Since the party now rests on a series of interlocking dynastic attachments, with the Queen-Emperor at the helm, there should be no ethical problems in elevating YSRâs son, already in politics as a Lok Sabha MP, to the Chief Ministerial gaddi. If a majority of MLAs also decide that YS Jagan Mohan Reddy is the best bet to harness the emotional turbulence to the partyâs advantage and, at the same time, keep the Reddy dominance broadly intact, the ubiquitous Congress high command is unlikely to say âNoâ. The experience-inexperience argument, after all, is a double-edged sword whose injudicious application could return to haunt Rahul Gandhi at a future date.
Regardless of whom the Congress eventually names as the successor to YSR, one feature of the succession process is apparent: There are no rules and procedures to facilitate it. Over the past few years, the Congress has evolved a system of consultation and approval: The legislature party gives its views to the central observers but then delegates the authority to Sonia Gandhi. The Congress president may take heed of the preference of MLAs or impose her own nominee on the State which has no choice but to grin and bear it. By and large in the choice of Chief Ministers, Sonia Gandhi has not been driven by flights of whimsy. She has broadly maintained the balance between sensitivities and political calculations. To that extent, she has departed from the legacy of both Indira Gandhi and Rajiv Gandhi who were wary of strong leaders in the States.
However, the fact that Sonia has hitherto acted with tact does not lessen the inherent dangers of a system where local democracy is remote-controlled by the Centre. A spiteful cabal in Delhi has the power to make a mockery of the principles of democracy. With the modified anti-defection laws making it virtually impossible for the dissatisfied to break away from the parent party, even where fundamental principles are involved, the stranglehold of the Centre on the States has been ensured.
That there is a need to institutionalise the procedures governing political appointments isnât in doubt. In the case of legislature parties, the principle is relatively simple: The MLAs and MPs must be allowed to choose their leader. The party high commands have a right to advise and supervise the process but the choice should rest exclusively with the elected legislators. Some people may object to the impulses that have made YSRâs son the frontrunner for the Chief Ministerâs job in Andhra Pradesh, just as others have objected to BJP MLAs in Rajasthan reposing faith in Vasundhara Raje continuing as Leader of Opposition. There can be only one response to these misgivings: Tough luck<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
pioneer.com
Swapan Dasgupta
The death of YS Rajasekhara Reddy in tragic circumstances has triggered a wave of mass hysteria that may well influence the Congressâs choice of his successor. Since the party now rests on a series of interlocking dynastic attachments, with the Queen-Emperor at the helm, there should be no ethical problems in elevating YSRâs son, already in politics as a Lok Sabha MP, to the Chief Ministerial gaddi. If a majority of MLAs also decide that YS Jagan Mohan Reddy is the best bet to harness the emotional turbulence to the partyâs advantage and, at the same time, keep the Reddy dominance broadly intact, the ubiquitous Congress high command is unlikely to say âNoâ. The experience-inexperience argument, after all, is a double-edged sword whose injudicious application could return to haunt Rahul Gandhi at a future date.
Regardless of whom the Congress eventually names as the successor to YSR, one feature of the succession process is apparent: There are no rules and procedures to facilitate it. Over the past few years, the Congress has evolved a system of consultation and approval: The legislature party gives its views to the central observers but then delegates the authority to Sonia Gandhi. The Congress president may take heed of the preference of MLAs or impose her own nominee on the State which has no choice but to grin and bear it. By and large in the choice of Chief Ministers, Sonia Gandhi has not been driven by flights of whimsy. She has broadly maintained the balance between sensitivities and political calculations. To that extent, she has departed from the legacy of both Indira Gandhi and Rajiv Gandhi who were wary of strong leaders in the States.
However, the fact that Sonia has hitherto acted with tact does not lessen the inherent dangers of a system where local democracy is remote-controlled by the Centre. A spiteful cabal in Delhi has the power to make a mockery of the principles of democracy. With the modified anti-defection laws making it virtually impossible for the dissatisfied to break away from the parent party, even where fundamental principles are involved, the stranglehold of the Centre on the States has been ensured.
That there is a need to institutionalise the procedures governing political appointments isnât in doubt. In the case of legislature parties, the principle is relatively simple: The MLAs and MPs must be allowed to choose their leader. The party high commands have a right to advise and supervise the process but the choice should rest exclusively with the elected legislators. Some people may object to the impulses that have made YSRâs son the frontrunner for the Chief Ministerâs job in Andhra Pradesh, just as others have objected to BJP MLAs in Rajasthan reposing faith in Vasundhara Raje continuing as Leader of Opposition. There can be only one response to these misgivings: Tough luck<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->