People's Verdict |
Explosion in the ‘laboratory’
Results from zilla and taluka panchayat elections in Gujarat,
considered Hindutva’s laboratory show a clear-cut rejection by the people of the
communal experiment
BY SATYAKAM JOSHI One state where the successful functioning of the panchayati
raj system has been visible is in the state of Gujarat. High levels of people’s
participation in the panchayati raj institutions (PRIs) in the normal
course and during the election process have ensured the vitality of this
institution, at present just five–years–old. For this reason, PRI election
results have always been analysed as indicative of future political fortunes by
pundits who even use the zilla and taluka panchayat poll results to
predict the colour and hue of the ruling and opposition benches in the next
state assembly. The year 1995 was the first election ever of PRIs in the
state of Gujarat. The BJP captured the zilla and taluka panchayats and
ruled the PRIs for five years. Following this trend, two years later, in 1997,
the BJP won the assembly elections and established its rule over Gujarat. For
the first time in the state of Gujarat, both the panchayats and the state
assembly were in the control of the BJP. In 1995, the BJP had won 18 of the 19 zilla panchayats and
154 of the 183 taluka panchayats. The success of the Hindutva wave
throughout the state, coupled with the dysfunctional state of the Congress — the
traditional ruling party in the state — were the major factors behind this
result. The BJP came to power through a clever mobilization of rural
voters on a full–scale Hindutva agenda, laden with false promises. After
coming to power in the panchayats, however, the ruling BJP simply failed to
fulfill even the barest minimum of its electoral promises — of generating
employment and eradicating poverty. Greater attention and time was concentrated on a divisive
agenda, provoking people’s sentiments on religious lines, the important cases
here being the violent communal riots in Dangs and other tribal areas of Gujarat
during 1998 fomented between Christian and non–Christian tribals. Similarly the cases of intra–religious marriages between
Muslim boys and Hindu girls in rural Gujarat were converted by the agents of
Hindutva into a communal issue. The BJP and other segments of the sangh
parivar, like the VHP, BD and the RSS, took a highly communal and
provocative stand that succeeded in terrorising the rural poor. Simultaneously, in rural areas of the state, between 1995 and
2000, BJP’s elected representatives to the panchayats did not pay any attention
to basic problems like poverty alleviation, creation of employment, providing
basic drinking water and other facilities. There were even cases at the gram panchayat level
where Dalit women were elected as sarpanch under the new panchayati raj
amendment, but not given power in any real sense. One of the Dalit sarpanchs
of Matvad — a BJP ruled gram panchayat — in Navsari district of south
Gujarat was not allowed to work. Besides, false cases were made against her as
the land owning community was opposed to her pro–poor approach. Instead of
favouring her, the state level leadership sided with the landlords. Such
anti–poor stance of the BJP leadership became more and more visible over the
past five years. All the tribal areas of Gujarat, notified as a Scheduled
Areas under the Fifth Schedule to the Constitution of India by the Scheduled
Area Act, 1977, are spread over nine districts and 38 talukas and are home to 14
per cent of the state’s tribal population. The provision of the Panchayats
(Extension to the Scheduled Area) Act, 1996 is applicable to the tribal areas of
Gujarat too. In consonance with this Act, the Gujarat government passed the bill
in December 1997 that applies to all tribal areas of the state. Under the
provision of this Act, the local gram sabha needed to be consulted before
acquiring land in any of the Scheduled Area for development projects. Under this Act, it is also mandatory for the gram sabha
to approve all plans, programmes and projects for social and economic
development before they are taken up for implementation. The above procedure is
to be followed even if the urgency clause is evoked. This bill was passed by the
Gujarat assembly during the tenure of the Sankarsingh Waghela ministry. (Waghela
had revolted and toppled the then Keshubhai Patel ministry and formed his
government in 1996). After the BJP returned to power in 1998, it did not take any
interest in implementing this law. There were repeated demands from tribal
leaders to implement it but the BJP high command never took them seriously.
Where the gram sabhas managed to have their way, they restricted the operation
of the sangh parivar and its cadres in completing their ‘unfinished
business’ in tribal areas since a majority of the cadres belong to the urban
areas. It is a well–established fact that under the BJP–ruled regime
in Gujarat, it is the RSS, the VHP and the Bajrang Dal who have been calling the
shots, controlling both the panchayats and departments of the state government.
It is functionaries of the RSS who dictate terms to elected representatives, so
much so that without a go–ahead from the RSS, elected representatives have even
been restrained from taking any decisions. A widely known fact, oft–quoted in newspaper articles, was
that ministers and presidents of taluka or zilla panchayats who did not
belong to the RSS were under constant surveillance, watched and monitored by RSS
men. Panchayat presidents and even ministers just could not take any decisions
on their own. This caused acute dissatisfaction and anger, often displayed by
the non–RSS BJP politician in public. A glaring example was Babubhai Halpati, a tribal taluka
panchayat president from the Umbergaon taluka of Valsad district in South
Gujarat. Babubhai had been with the BJP since the 1980s and had worked
painstakingly for the party, eventually succeeding in capturing the Umbergaon
taluka panchayat in 1995. After coming to power, Babubhai tried working
independently but the RSS and its workers interfered at every juncture. Babubhai,
agitated with such an undemocratic style of RSS, reacted. However, the
interference from RSS workers persisted and increased leading to his decision to
quit the BJP. In the just–concluded election, he worked for Congress. There are
many such examples in Gujarat. The friction between the BJP and the RSS touched an all–time
high leading to BJP cadres making open allegations against the state BJP
president, Rajendrasingh Rana, state vice–presidents Suresh Gandhi and Amit Shah
and party general secretary, Jayantibhai Kevat stating that they were hard–core
RSS workers. The party brought over another staunch RSS leader, Sanjay Joshi,
from Nagpur known for his unflinching pro–RSS views. Another important office
bearer of the party, Gorthandas Zadafia, is an active member of the VHP. These factors help to explain significantly the reasons
behind the debacle of the BJP in the recent panchayat elections. Out of 23
district panchayats, which went to the polls in September, Congress
captured 22 district panchayats. Out of a total of 735 district panchayat
seats for which elections were held Congress bagged 519 seats while BJP managed
to secured only 207 seats; 14 went to other parties. Similarly in the taluka
panchayats, out of 210 taluka panchayats, Congress captured 160
taluka panchayats in the state. There were a total of 3,848 seats out of which the Congress
bagged 2,299 while BJP secured only 1,248. It was thus that the BJP was routed
in the panchayat polls in the state. Ironically, the Congress won by a thumping majority not due
to its performance but due to the strong negative swing against the BJP. The
rural voters of Gujarat are the major contributors to the BJP defeat. But,
Congress is a divided house and intense factionalism still prevails As we go to press, the BJP leadership is busy analysing its
debacle and has constituted a committee to look into the matter. Apart from the
super–imposition of the RSS–VHP cadres in panchayat affairs, widespread
corruption and uncontrollable price hike are also considered to be important
reasons behind debacle. The rural poor are unable to cope with the price hike of
grains and other essential commodities. Grain prices at the ration shop are at
par with the free market, hence it is difficult for rural poor to survive.
Corruption by party members is also a key reason for defeat. State jail and
rural housing minister, Jaspal Singh has blamed corruption in high places as the
main reason for the BJP’s debacle. Many panchayati raj functionaries are also
openly saying this. A district panchayat account officer told this writer on
condition of anonymity: "Corruption existed during Congress rule, too. But the
level and manner in which the BJP leaders were involved in corruption is utterly
mind–boggling. Even grass root level BJP workers had to bribe the higher level
BJP leaders in order to get things done. The RSS–VHP cadres are extorting money
from poor people. I have not seen this scale of corruption in thirty years of
service in panchayat." An optimistic reading of the voting trends and the results
suggest that the BJP’s tactics of capturing power through communal politics has
been understood, and even rejected, by rural voters. This combined with a
rejection of the superimposition of RSS–VHP–Bajrang Dal cadres on the more
liberal sections within the BJP has sent a clear message to the ruling BJP. While the primary aim of the panchayti raj institution
is to delegate more power to local people, under the BJP–ruled panchayats the
power remained in the hands of the dominating few. The victory of Congress is
not the victory of party but it is a victory of inherent secular-democratic
fabric of Indians. (The author is associated with the Centre for Social Studies, Surat). |