August-September 2009 
Year 16    No.143
Editorial


Indian democracy: A stocktaking

An anniversary provides an opportunity to take stock. The 62nd year of Indian independence therefore seemed like a good occasion to visit, through a serious analysis of the functioning of Indian state institutions, the quality of our democracy. In this issue, Communalism Combat has through a distinguished list of contributors evaluated the functioning of many institutions of the state, the benchmark being their commitment to fundamental freedoms and basic human rights. We have also looked at what democracy has meant for women, Adivasis, Dalits and religious minorities.

Though the picture remains bleak, the silver lining in the cloud comes from successes like the right to information movement that gave rise to a central, enabling law. This law, enacted in 2005, gives every citizen the right to demand details of information from the hitherto forbidden cave of government records. Even after we gave ourselves this law, many among those who hold the reins of influence and power continue to restrict its empowering influence. One of the saddest moments for our democracy was when we were faced with the intransigence of the upper echelons of the Indian judiciary who refused to fulfil this promise of a culture of accountability and transparency. The triumph however was that many of India’s high court judges voluntarily disclosed their assets and made them public.

A special law was needed in India to ensure a citizen’s inalienable right to know. Poor literacy figures matched by high dropout rates in state schools forced Parliament to pass a law giving all children from six to 14 years of age an inalienable right to education. While substantial controversy surrounds the law that was passed on August 4 this year – given that one, the preschool group has been kept out of the purview of the act and two, the new law takes no clear position against the privatisation of education – some substantial changes on the ground are likely to follow this enactment. With hunger and starvation stalking our rural and urban populations, not to mention the subversion and corruption in the Public Distribution System, a right to food law is also on the anvil.

Laws, in both content and application, need a serious reappraisal in the Indian context. The failure to drastically alter and reform many laws which predate India’s independence has resulted in a contradiction between the Indian Constitution on the one hand and laws that actually militate against both equality and non-discrimination on the other. The Police Act is one such law. During the 16 years of its existence CC has been at the forefront of the movement for police reform. The Indian police force continues to be governed by a Police Act enacted by the British, a colonial power intent on controlling an alien population. Officers of the Indian Police Service constitute barely three or four per cent of the police force while the vast constabulary – normally hired after completing a Class X or XII-level education – have to live with poor working conditions and an absence of refresher training on the job. No political party, regardless of ideological affiliation, is keen to free the Indian police from political control. Increasingly violent and unconstitutional actions by policemen have become the norm today. Only stray acts by exceptional individuals sworn to constitutional norms and values redeem this image of the police. Outdated sections of Indian criminal law, such as Section 197 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, grant public servants impunity from prosecution and act as further encouragement for unaccountable actions.

The 1980s saw the enactment of several laws aimed at empowering sections of the population that are discriminated against by both society and state. The rape and dowry laws, followed more recently by the Domestic Violence Act, are some examples. The Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act 1989, which celebrates 20 years of its existence in 2009, is another. None of these enactments have resulted in diminished violent crimes against women or the scheduled castes and tribes! Is it because, put simply, we have become more violent all around or is it that law enforcement and accountability in law enforcement has not accompanied the enactment of new legislation?

More than six decades later, institutions of the Indian state need to seriously examine whether they in fact exist and function for the people, of the people and by the people. Bowing to global concerns on the state of human rights in India, India enacted the Protection of Human Rights Act in 1993 and the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC), a statutory body, was born. Sixteen years later, far from receiving a glowing report card as an institution that demands and ensures high human rights standards from state institutions, the NHRC’s own composition and functioning raise important issues of accountability, transparency and adherence to basic rights norms.

Once more we offer our readers the opportunity to take stock of these critical questions through the incisive analysis of our valued contributors. We hope you find this issue, which also marks ours 16th anniversary, useful even as we eagerly look forward to your comments.

—Editors


[ Subscribe | Contact Us | Archives | Khoj | Aman ]
[ Letter to editor  ]

Copyrights © 2002, Sabrang Communications & Publishing Pvt. Ltd.