A COMMENTARY ON CONSTITUTIONAL
DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF INDIA
By
Dr. Jag Pal Singh
'Sameer Kutir', 642/7, Jagriti Vihar,
Meerut - 250004. (U.P.), INDIA.
ABOUT THE BOOK
In these days all over the country, there is a very serious and genuine demand for changing the
existing Vicious Circle of Constitutional Democratic Republic. Ill conceived definitions of the
concepts of "voter"; "right to vote" and "election" provide the foundation to the Vicious Circle of
Constitutional Democratic Republic. Accepting the demand and popular dictum, "in order to
achieve the marvelous the unthinkable must be thought", the present book defines all the
three above mentioned concepts on the basis of their inherent essence and spirit and proposes
a "partyless six-tier decentralized bottom-to-top institutional structure of governance along
with 'Rule of Maximum Vote' based procedure for election for its constitution and operation.
The proposed structure of governance and procedure for election are capable enough to ensure
equal opportunity-liberty-right to contest election and to cast his/her vote in favor of the
candidate nominated by himself/herself only to every voter of the country. Equal opportunityliberty-right to contest election is a common denominator for challenging the Vicious Circle of
Constitutional Democratic Republic and examining the democratic validity of the proposed
institutional structure of governance and procedure for election.
Instead of putting demand for different types of rights; different types of equalities; different
types of liberties; different types of justices and different types of securities, the reformers
and the social activists working in the country must put demand jointly for democratic right,
i.e., "equal opportunity-liberty-right to contest election" or "availability of every participating
voter of the constituency/electoral college for getting his/her thoughts-expressions-actions
evaluated by every participating voter of the constituency/electoral college on the basis of
day-to-day interaction. The demand for democratic rights would certainly help in mobilizing
over seventy crore voters of the country mentally and physically for initiating and running a
nation-wide Revolutionary Democratic Movement successfully.
Name and Address of the Publisher:
First Published: 2008
Copyright: Author
ISBN...............
Printed in India
FOREWORD
A Commentary on Constitutional Democratic Republic of India authored by Dr. Jag Pal Singh is a
thought–provoking book on what has gone wrong with the Indian secular, democratic republic.
The book raises lot of important questions and advocates for systemic changes so that India will
become in real sense a socialist, secular, and sovereign democratic republic. The author has
rightly focused on the drawbacks with the present Indian polity and has in his own way
advocated some solutions, which are very radical in nature and which will require overhauling
of the entire political system. It may be a gigantic task for anybody to take up. Some of the
issues raised which weaken the foundations of the democracy in India are important enough to
be seriously taken note off. The emphasis of the book on the importance of elections and the
Right to Vote is the cornerstone of the main theme of the book. Though there may be
difference of opinion on various concepts developed in the book. The author has exercised the
right to express his views freely.
The book will be a significant contribution and the pleasure reading for all those who are
interested in laying down a new road map for the Indian democracy. Though the ideas
expressed in the book are exclusively within the domain of the author which one may or may
not agree but the author deserves compliments for thinking out of the box to solve the
problems faced by the Indian political system.
Prof. RANBIR SINGH
Vice-Chancellor
Nalsar University of Law,
HYDERABAD
FOREWORD
Every now and then one is fortunate to come across a revolutionary thinker who changes the
face of the nation, and proves to be a boon to mankind. Dr. Singh is one such person. His
crystal clear concepts of a successful democracy by the people, of the people and for the
people is unique. His logic is impeccable. Freedom has eluded us in that there is no real
governance nor is power vested in the people under the present system devised by the vested
interests. The system, "top to bottom", is anti-democratic which is based on the concept of
"justification and not verification". His candid concepts of a system evolved on the basis of
"bottom to top" is the only solution for a true democratic and socialistic se tup, which will
realize the aspirations of the freedom fighters to have a true democracy.
None can deny his pointed statement that "Redressal of the damage done to India and Indians
demands immediate replacement of the present process of politicization by the process of
socialization." There is no doubt that to the people of India, democracy has become a farce, a
tool for criminals and politicians to the masses.
His rationalization has appealed me, and I am certain it will appeal to all conscience oriented
people with aspirations to see his dream of a glorious future for our country reaches the hearts
of the people.
RANJAN DWIVEDI
Advocate
Supreme Court of India
New Delhi
PREFACE
"It is interesting to see how the so-called Third World countries in which more than threefourth of the humanity lives have responded to the UN Declaration. As Jennings puts it,
'psychology of the government is in fact more important than the form of government.' Initially
every country that attained independence religiously swore by democracy and human rights.
But with time, democracy came to be qualified by injecting their own non-democratic ideology
into it, preserving only the "holy word". Philippines, Malaysia and Liberia justified dictatorships
by calling it Individualist Democracy. Saudi Arabia and Ethiopia called their type of aristocracy
Elitist Democracy while the military dictatorships of Burma, Pakistan and Egypt called
themselves Guided Democracies. Indonesia's Soekarno went to the extent of even labelling the
election-based democracy as a disease that was a result from free fight liberalism. As there
was no effective UN intervention on these 'developments', the human rights violations
committed by them were also largely ignored" (Pinto, 2004).
"Democracy, in all class divided societies, according to Marx, has always remained as the
dictatorship of some dominating class over others. For instance, in the Greek city states, the
idea of equal rights of men did not apply to the slaves. Again, the capitalist democracy, in
reality, is a democracy for the minority, only for the possessing class. As a result of capitalist
exploitation, the vast majority of the people of the society are suffering by want and poverty
and, therefore, democracy is nothing to them and politics is nothing to them. A true
democracy, i.e., majority rule, Marx claimed, is possible in socialist democracy because it not
only gives rights to the individuals, but also ensures the material conditions necessary to enjoy
and improve them" (Satyanarayana, 2004).
"In the present context capitalist democracies in its myriad forms cannot bring sustainable
peace and prosperity for the people at large. At the present moment the most powerful
democratic power remains the major threat to global power. It is the real source of global
"terrorism". While making this observation, we must be careful about the fact that the major
socialist experiments made in the past - be it in the Soviet Union or in China - degenerated in
course of time into Party dictatorships. They failed to hold high the banner of socialist
democracy which must be both an extension of capitalist democracy and a transcendence of it.
That is not really a wishful thinking. In a socialist society where the commanding heights of the
economy are in the hands of the State and the medium enterprises are allowed to be run by
cooperatives of the working masses, it is not difficult for some opposition groups to function
freely in the domain of politics. Freedom of speech and expression are not anathema to a
socialistic order. On the contrary, such freedoms are a sine qua non for ensuring stability of the
socialist system" (Panda, 2004).
"The rule of law is thus being eroded before our very eyes at the beginning of the 21st Century.
The people of the world have been reduced to helpless spectators when the international law
painstakingly nurtured over the last three centuries and more is being undone. Powerful States
attack small States at will, occupy them, change governments and set up collaborator regimes,
kill and maim the civil population, destroy their infrastructure, exploit their natural resources
for their own benefit, loot or destroy their cultural heritage, all in the name of replacing
tyranny and depotism with Democracy" (Shahabuddin 2005).
Alam (1999) reports that "though people value the system of representation, they do not find
the representatives elected by them as worthy of regard." In 1971, as much as 58 percent of
voters said that the elected representatives do not pay attention to, or care about, voters'
interests and concerns. The situation became worse by 1996 when the percentage of
disillusioned voters went up to as much as 63 percent. Reacting on it, Sau (2002) wrote, "Going
by Javeed Alam's incisive study we can say that our commitment to democracy is deepening;
but our voices are increasingly falling short of reaching the august precincts of legislature and
judiciary. We are being increasingly alienated. Yet, every one of us has an invaluable story to
tell, a precious lesson of experience to deposit with the society. It is time we have a forum,
where everyone will have an invitation to come and speak. Let billion voices rise."
On the basis of the above quotes it can be logically and firmly concluded that: (i) democratic
system of governance is still pre-matured; (ii) all over the world academicians and researchers
in general and the communists in particular are more interested in highlighting the failure of
democratic system of governance in achieving its intended goal, i.e., ensuring different types
of human rights, different types of equalities, different types of justices, different types of
liberties and different types of securities to every citizen of the State; and (iii) required efforts
have not been made (a) to identify the tools which implement democratic system of
governance, (b) to pinpoint the defects in the structures of these tools, and (c) to find out the
feasible solutions. The present situation of democratic system of governance can be equated
with the crashed aircraft. In order to find out maladies and feasible remedies, one has to postmortem the black box related to the democratic system of governance, i.e., "(alternate)
structures of the tools which implement democratic system of governance". The present book is
an effort in this direction.
Right to vote is the foundation of Democratic Republic. Right to vote demands the multi-tier
institutional structure of governance and procedure for election which must ensure the
availability of every participating voter of the constituency/electoral college for getting
his/her thoughts-expressions-actions evaluated by every participating voter of the
constituency/electoral college on the basis of day-to-day interaction. Multi-tier institutional
structure of governance constituted and operated by so called ideology based political parties
and as per 'the first-past-the post' system based procedure for election converted the
democratic right to vote into right to endorse the choice of one or the other political party or
of any independent candidate. Ill conceived definitions of the concepts of 'voter', 'right to vote'
and 'election' destroyed the theoretical and legal base of 'right to vote'. In brief, through
Constitution and the Representation of the People Act, the Constituent Assembly provided to
the sovereign citizens of independent India an unbreakable Vicious Circle of Constitutional
Democratic Republic, which is a very serious legislative conspiracy and a huge fraud
perpetrated by the legislators of independent India against the voters of the so called largest
democracy of the world.
In order to immunize the ill conceived definitions of the above mentioned concepts from
judicial review and the unbreakable Vicious Circle of Constitutional Democratic Republic from
the public action through referendum, the Constituent Assembly of India included Article 329
and Article 368 respectively in the Constitution. Article 368 provides monopolistic authority to
the Parliament - which is the shadow of the Political Parties - to amend the Constitution. The
Political Parties and their leaders could have corrected the legislative conspiracy and huge
fraud through constitutional amendments. Instead, the Political Parties and their leaders
utilized the Constitution and its provisions for their own existence-survival-growth. Since last
twenty five years, the voters of the country have been giving fractured verdicts against the
governance of so called ideology based party system, which have never been seen-heard-felt by
the Political Parties and their leaders from the angle of the voters of the country. In this
situation, initiating and running a Revolutionary Democratic Movement in the country
successfully for realising the democratic rights, i.e., "equal opportunity-liberty-right to contest
election and to cast his/her vote in favour of the candidate nominated by himself/herself only
to every voter of the country, is the only option left with the citizens of this great nation.
The subject matter of the book has been divided into five chapters. The first chapter explains
the proposed "partyless six-tier decentralised bottom-to-top institutional structure of
governance" and 'Rule of Maximum Vote" based procedure for election. The second chapter
provides insights of the Constitutional Democratic Republic. Third and fourth chapters deal
with the intellectuals and judicial commentary on the Constitutional Democratic Republic
respectively. The fifth chapter summarises the subject matter of the book.
I am aware of the fact that this book could have not been completed without the help and
active support from all the members of the Revolutionary Democratic Movement in general and
its Office Secretary Mr. Arvind Kumar Tewari, Working President Mr. Ranjan Dwivedi, Finance
Secretary Mr. Radhe Shyam Sharma, Vice-President Mr. Mathilisharan and General Secretary Mr.
Feroze Ahmed in particular. Therefore, it is my prime duty and responsibility to express my
deep sense of gratitude to all of them for their valuable support and inspiration.
The author would like to dedicate his thoughts on different aspects related to the ideal form of
'Representative Democracy' to humanity in general and to Indian citizens in particular with the
hope that one day they would put collective and cumulative demand for their democratic right,
i.e., "equal opportunity for getting elected".
(JAG PAL SINGH)
CONTENTS
TITLE
PAGE
FORWARD
iv-v
PREFACE
vi-x
I.
CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK
1.1 Operators of the Democratic System of Governance
1.2 Democratic Institutional Structure of Governance
1.3 Democratic Procedure for Election
1.4 Interdependence
1.5 Conclusion
1-10
II.
CONSTITUTIONAL DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC
2.1 Constitutional Structure of Governance
2.2 Political Parties
2.3 Existing Procedure for Election
2.4 Guidelines
2.5 Power of Amendment
2.6 Conclusion
11-41
III.
INTELLECTUALS COMMENTARY
3.1 Commentary on Constitution Itself
3.2 Legislators: Obvious Outcome of the Combination
3.3 Working of the Political Parties
3.4 Working of the Institutional Structure of Governance
3.5 Working of the Procedure for Election
3.6 Conclusion
42-73
IV.
JUDICIAL COMMENTARY
4.1 Elector/Voter
4.2 Right to Vote/Electoral Right
4.3 Election
4.4 Bar to Interference by Courts in Electoral Matters.
4.5 Constitutional Validity
4.6 Vicious Circle of Constitutional Democratic Republic
4.7 Conclusion
74-105
V.
SUMMARY
5.1 Sovereign-Socialist-Secular
5.2 Democratic Republic
5.3 Conclusion
106-117
REFERENCES
118-126
CHAPTER – I
CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK
In order to block the continuation of dynastic rule, the sovereign citizens of independent India
consciously or unconsciously accepted the Democratic Republic as a system of governance. In
dynastic rule, single tier institution of governance is sequentially constituted and operated by
the members of one and the same family. On the contrary, in Democratic Republic multi-tier
institutional structure of governance is constituted and operated by the voters of the country
and their nominees/representatives. In case of Democratic Republic, the constitutors and
operators of multi-tier institutional structure of governance are bound to be the obvious
outcome of the adopted multi-tier institutional structure of governance and the procedure for
election. Accordingly, the subject matter of this chapter has been divided in five parts. The
first part describes the expected roles of the constitutors and operators of the multi-tier
institutional structure of governance. The second part provides insight into the Democratic
Institutional Structure of Governance. The third part explains the Democratic Procedure for
Election. The fourth part explains the interdependence between the multi-tier institutional
structure of governance and procedure for election and the fifth part deals with the
conclusion.
I. OPERATORS OF THE DEMOCRATIC SYSTEM OF GOVERNANCE:
Operation of multi-tier institutional structure of governance includes formulation and
implementation
of
cultural-religious-social-economic-judicial-administrative
systems,
institutions, policies, laws, acts, rules and programmes. Objectives, quality and nature of the
ultimate outcome to be achieved out of the operation of multi-tier institutional structure of
governance largely depend on by whom the multi-tier institutional structure of governance is
being constituted: by the nominees of the political parties? Or by the voters of the country and
their nominees? Or by the opportunists? It is quite obvious that the nominees of the Political
Parties would prefer to formulate and implement systems, institutions, policies, laws, acts,
rules and programmes for the existence- survival- growth of the Political Parties; the voters of
the country and their nominees would prefer to formulate and implement systems, institutions,
policies, laws, acts, rules and programmes for the existence- survival- growth-welfare of the
citizens of the country and the opportunists would prefer to formulate and implement systems,
institutions, policies, laws, acts, rules and programmes for the existence- survival- growth of
selves and their family members.
II. DEMOCRATIC INSTITUTIONAL STRUCTURE OF GOVERNANCE:
Existence- survival- growth- welfare of the citizens of the country demands a multi-tier
institutional structure of governance which must be constituted and operated by the voters and
their nominees only. The major characteristics of such multi-tier institutional structure of
governance are as under:
1. Equal opportunity-liberty-right to every voter of the constituency/Electoral College for getting his/her
thoughts-expressions-actions evaluated by every participating voter of the constituency/electoral
college on the basis of day-to-day interaction, is a must.
2. All the members of Lok Sabha and State Assemblies, Chief Ministers and Prime Minister must be elected
as per 'Rule of Maximum Vote'.
3. Every constituency/Electoral College must have an institution of governance.
4. The higher level of institution of governance must be constituted after a period of six months from the
date of constituting all the lower level institutions of governance.
Multi-tier institutional structure of governance can be either centralized top-to-bottom or
decentralized bottom-to-top. In multi-tier centralized top-to-bottom institutional structure of
governance, sizes of Lok Sabha and State Assemblies constituencies in terms of number of
voters are bound to be very large. Also, multi-tier centralized top-to-bottom institutional
structure of governance forces: (a) to initiate the process of politicization of multi-tier
centralized top-to-bottom institutional structure of governance; (b) to adopt justificationauthority based evaluation-monitoring mechanism creating very wide space and scope for
corruption; and (c) to adopt punitive measures for sensitizing human emotions, sentiments,
thoughts and overall behavior. In fact, the process of politicization starts from politicizing
multi-tier centralized top-to-bottom institutional structure of governance and completes it's
journey after politicizing criminal systems, institutions and individuals. It is quite clear that
multi-tier centralized top-to-bottom institutional structure of governance is incapable to
satisfy any of the four characteristics of multi-tier institutional structure of governance
constituted and operated by the voters of the country and their nominees.
In multi-tier decentralized bottom-to-top institutional structure of governance, the size of the
constituency/Electoral College is always within the capacity of a normal voter to observe
thoughts-expressions-actions of every voter of the constituency/Electoral College on the basis
of day-to-day interaction. In multi-tier decentralized bottom-to-top institutional structure of
governance, the concerned voters participate directly in constituting and operating the lowest
or grassroots level institution of governance under the leadership of their
nominee/representative. In the constitution and operation of the higher level institutions of
governance, the participating voters of different constituencies/electoral colleges related to
the concerned institution of governance participate indirectly through their
nominees/representatives. Multi-tier decentralized bottom-to-top institutional structure of
governance forces: (a) to initiate the process of socialization of multi-tier decentralized
bottom-to-top institutional structure of governance; (b) to adopt verification-consumers
oriented evaluation-monitoring mechanism eliminating the space and scope of corruption; and
(c) to adopt preventive-incentive measures for sensitizing human emotions, sentiments,
thoughts and over all behavior. The process of socialization also starts from socializing multitier decentralized bottom-to-top institutional structure of governance and completes its
journey after socializing the process of sensitizing the human emotions, sentiments, thoughts
and over all behavior. Multi-tier decentralized bottom-to-top institutional structure of
governance is capable enough to satisfy all the four characteristics of multi-tier institutional
structure of governance constituted and operated by the voters of the country and their
nominees.
In the light of the above discussion, the concept of democracy (direct democracy) can be
redefined in the following manner, "Single tier institution of governance constituted and
operated by all the eligible citizens (people) of the country." Similarly, the concept of
Democratic Republic can be defined in terms of "Party-less multi-tier decentralized bottom-totop institutional structure of governance constituted and operated by the participating voters
of the country and their nominees." In such governances, 'givers' and 'takers' are one and the
same, i.e. "the people". Such governances, by design, are "for the people". In fact, as the
system of governance, Democratic Republic, Stateless Society, Swaraj and Partyless Democracy
theoretically, behaviorally and procedurally are perfect substitute of each other. Partyless
multi-tier decentralized bottom-to-top institutional structure of governance in varying degrees
and procedure for election based on the "Rule of Maximum Vote" for its constitution and
operation are the pre-conditions for implementing all these forms of system of governance.
In the light of the major characteristics of party-less multi-tier institutional structure of
governance constituted and operated by the participating voters of the country and their
nominees and also demographic size of India, a six-tier decentralized bottom-to-top
institutional structure of governance is being given below:
Ward (a geographical area having around two hundred population) — Village/Molalla (ten
wards) — Cluster of Villages/Mohallas (ten villages/ mohallas) — District (twenty clusters of
villages/mohallas) — State (twenty five districts) — Nation (one hundred and ten states). In the
present circumstances, the size of the Lok Sabha should not be more than one hundred and ten
members.
III. DEMOCRATIC PROCEDURE FOR ELECTION:
Constitution of multi-tier decentralized bottom-to-top institutional structure of governance
covers elections of Members of Lok Sabha, State Assemblies, Chief Ministers and Prime
Minister. All of them can be elected either as per 'Rule of Majority Vote' or as per 'Rule of
Maximum Vote'. 'Rule of Majority Vote' is based on the concept of 'Median' and 'Rule of
Maximum Vote' is based on the concept of 'Mode' of Statistics Science. In case of 'Rule of
Majority Vote', at every election the number of contesting candidates must be two only; every
voter of the constituency/electoral college must cast his/her vote at the election; existence of
two outside agencies in the name of Political Parties for nominating two contesting candidates
at every election is a must and every participating voter of the constituency/electoral college
has to endorse the choice of one or the other Political Party in the name of 'Right to Vote'.
Application of 'Rule of Majority Vote' is generally adopted in case of multi-tier centralized topto-bottom institutional structure of governance.
In case of 'Rule of Maximum Vote', the number of contesting candidates at every election must
be equal to the number of participating voters of the constituency/electoral college; every
voter of the constituency/electoral college must have equal opportunity-liberty-right to
contest election and to cast his/her vote in favor of the candidate nominated by
himself/herself only. The participating voter nominated by the maximum number of voters of
the constituency/electoral college is supposed to get elected as a nominee/ representative of
the constituency/electoral college. This, in a way, confirms direct and indirect participation of
every participating voter of the country not only in constituting multi-tier decentralized
bottom-to-top institutional structure of governance but also in formulating and implementing
cultural-religions-social-economic-judicial-administrative systems, institutions, policies, acts,
laws, rules and programmes for ensuring (a) justice, equality, liberty, perfect competition and
fraternity; (b) fulfillment of all the legitimate needs of every citizen of the country; (c)
effectiveness of Indian principles of co-existence, participation and inter-dependence; and (d)
simultaneous development of every citizen of India, every local society of India, Indigenousness
and India as a whole.
Situation having the number of contesting candidates more than two and less than the number
of participating voters of the constituency/electoral college does not satisfy the pre-conditions
either of 'Rule of Majority Vote' or of 'Rule of Maximum Vote'. This is the situation which suits to
the opportunists. This rule of election is applicable only in case of multi-tier centralized topto-bottom institutional structure of governance.
It is a well known fact that an individual voter cannot elect the representative of his/her
constituency/Electoral College. The concept of 'vote' in essence and spirit inherently
constitutes the personal choice of an individual participating voter of the
constituency/Electoral College. Application of such concept of 'vote' includes three inseparable
and interdependent democratic sub-functions - (a) right to evaluate thoughts-expressionsactions of every participating voter of the constituency/electoral college on the basis of dayto-day interaction; (b) out of all the participating voters of the constituency/electoral college
to select the most suitable one as a contesting candidate; and (c) through ballot paper or any
other media, to express his/her selection/nomination. As such, an individual voter is an
'evaluator-cum-nominator rather than an elector.
Election expresses communitarian choice of the participating voters of the
constituency/Electoral College. To be more specific, election expresses the level of agreement
among the participating voters of the constituency/Electoral College in respect of every
participating voter of the constituency/Electoral College. Level of agreement is a scale. The
least count of this scale is complete disagreement among the participating voters and the
highest count is complete agreement among the participating voters in respect of a particular
participating voter of the constituency/Electoral College. In case of complete disagreement,
every participating voter gets one vote only and in case of complete agreement, every
participating voter of the constituency/ Electoral College casts his/her vote in favor of one and
the same participating voter of the constituency/electoral college. Generally, the real
situation is supposed to be in between complete disagreement and complete agreement.
According to the above mentioned definition of 'election', the voters getting the highest, the
second highest and the third highest number of votes are to be declared elected. For special
circumstances, special provisions are a must. The voter getting the highest number of votes
would provide leadership for constituting the institution of governance at ward level. All the
voters of the concerned ward would be the members of this institution of governance (this is
the situation of direct democracy at the grass root level). At a time, a voter can not be the
member of more than one institution of governance. The voter getting the second highest
number of votes would represent all the voters of his/her constituency/Electoral College at the
next level of governance. On behalf of the voters of his/her constituency/electoral college,
he/she would participate in building and operating the institution of governance at this level
and also perform the roles of a voter and contesting candidate for electing three second-order
representatives. If in this election, his/her position is among the first two representatives then
in order to ensure the representation of the voters of his/her constituency/electoral college in
the village/mohalla level institution of governance, the voter getting the third highest number
of votes at ward level would replace the earlier representative and his/her membership at the
ward level institution of governance would automatically cease. This procedure for building the
institutional structure of governance would continue up to the national level. In case of world
level institutional structure of governance, the proposed procedure for election may also go up
to the world level. In the world level institution of governance, the number of the members
from a particular country is supposed to be in proportion of its population. The symbolic form
of the proposed procedure for election is as under:
Basic Voters/Candidates  The First Order Representatives (Voters/Candidates)  The
Second Order Representatives (Voters/ Candidates)  The Third Order Representatives
(Voters/Candidates)  The Fourth Order Representatives (Voters/Candidates)  The Fifth
Order Representatives (Voters/Candidates) 
The Sixth Order Representatives
(Voters/Candidates)  Prime Minister/ President.
The election of the representatives constituting the institution of governance at the next level
would be held after a period of six months from the date of constituting all the institutions of
governance at one lower level. All the concerned representatives would attend all the sessions
of the higher level institution of governance without right to vote. During this period, they
would get an opportunity to interact and know each other behaviorally. The resolution passed
and approved by the concerned institution of governance against any of its member would
disqualify him/her being the basic voter till the end of the next election.
IV. INTERDEPENDENCE:
Multi-tier institutional structure of governance and procedure for election are not two separate
and independent aspects. They are not only inter-connected with each other but very much
inter-dependent on each other. For multi-tier institutional structure of governance, procedure
for election plays the same role as the foundation plays for constructing a building. For
changing the foundation of the existing building one has to (i) get altogether a new and
different sketch or map of the building to be constructed; (ii) demolish the existing building;
and (iii) lay down the new and different foundation as per the new and different sketch or map
of the building to be constructed. Similarly, for electoral reform one has to ensure the
availability of commonly agreed a new and different multi-tier institutional structure of
governance, willingness of the citizens of the country to demolish the existing multi-tier
institutional structure of governance and to adopt the commonly agreed procedure for election
and a new and different multi-tier institutional structure of governance. Without these things,
it would not be possible to make any substantial change in the existing system of governance.
In other words, for ensuring the availability of every participating voter of the
constituency/electoral college for getting his/her thoughts- expressions- actions evaluated by
every participating voter of the constituency/electoral college on the basis of day-to-day
interaction, the reformers and the social activists intending election reform have to change
both existing procedure for election as well as the existing multi-tier institutional structure of
governance together and simultaneously.
V. CONCLUSION:
Availability of every participating voter of the constituency/electoral college for getting
his/her thoughts-expressions-actions evaluated by every participating voter of the
constituency/electoral college on the basis of day-to-day interaction is the inherent essence
and spirit of Democratic Republic. Multi-tier institutional structure of governance, procedure
for election and operators of the multi-tier institutional structure of governance, are the basic
tools which implement the democratic system of governance. Different types of multi-tier
institutional structures of governance; different types of procedures for election and different
types of operators constitute three compatible combinations. They are:
1. Multi-party based multi-tier centralized top-to-bottom institutional structure of
governance…….. constituted……. as per 'the first-past-the post' system and 'Rule of
Majority Vote'……… operated……… by the nominees of the Political Parties.
2. Partyless multi-tier decentralized bottom-to-top institutional structure of
governance……… constituted …….. as per 'Rule of Maximum Vote'…… operated……. by
the voters of the country and their nominees.
3. Multi-party based multi-tier centralized top-to-bottom institutional structure of
governance… constituted…… as per 'the first-past-the post' and 'Rule of Majority
Vote'…… operated……. by the opportunists in the form of Alliances.
Now, it is up to the sovereign citizens of sovereign India: (i) to choose the combination of
democratic structures of different tools with the help of the subject matter given in this
chapter itself; (ii) to validate the democratic structures of the tools on the basis of
intellectuals and judicial commentary given in the third and fourth chapters respectively; and
(iii) to give birth to a nationwide Revolutionary Democratic Movement for replacing
undemocratic structures of the tools by the democratic ones.
CHAPTER - 2
CONSTITUTIONAL DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC
Besides Preamble, Twelve Schedules and Two Appendixes, the Constitution of India includes
three hundred ninety five Articles on different subjects, aspects and issues. This chapter gives
brief idea about the Articles dealing with: (i) institutional structure of governance; (ii) political
parties; (iii) procedure for election; (iv) guidelines for formulating and implementing systems,
institutions, policies, acts, laws, rules and programmes; and (v) power to amend the
Constitution.
I. CONSTITUTIONAL STRUCTURE OF GOVERNANCE:
In order to implement the Democratic Republic in independent India, the Constituent Assembly
of the country evolved a multi-party based five-tier centralized top-to-bottom institutional
structure of governance. Parliament is at the top; State Assemblies are at the middle and
Three-tier Panchayat Raj at the bottom of the institutional structure of governance.
A. PARLIAMENT
Article 79: Constitution of Parliament- There shall be a Parliament for the Union which shall
consist of the President and two Houses to be known respectively as the Council of States and
the House of the People.
Article 80: Composition of the Council of States(1) The Council of States shall consist of - (a) twelve members to be nominated by the
President in accordance with the provisions of clause (3), and (b) not more than two hundred
and thirty-eight representatives of the States and of the Union territories.
(2) The allocation of seats in the Council of States to be filled by representatives of the States
and of the Union territories shall be in accordance with the provisions in that behalf contained
in the Fourth Schedule.
(3) The members to be nominated by the President under sub-clause (a) of clause (1) shall
consist of persons having special knowledge or practical experience in respect of such matters
as the following, namely.
Literature, science, art and social service.
(4) The representatives of each State in the Council of States shall be elected by the elected
members of the Legislative Assembly of the State in accordance with the system of
proportional representation by means of the single transferable vote.
(5) The representatives of the Union territories in the Council of States shall be chosen in such
manner as Parliament may by law prescribe.
Article 81. Composition of the House of the People(1) Subject to the provisions of article 331, the House of the People shall consist of (a) not
more than five hundred and thirty members chosen by direct election from territorial
constituencies in the States, and (b) not more than twenty members to represent the Union
territories, chosen in such manner as Parliament may by law provide.
(2) For the purposes of sub-clause (a) of clause (1); (a) there shall be allotted to each State a
number of seats in the House of the People in such manner that the ratio between that number
and the population of the State is, so far as practicable, the same for all States; and (b) each
State shall be divided into territorial constituencies in such manner that the ratio between the
population of each constituency and the number of seats allotted to it is, so far as practicable,
the same throughout the State: Provided that the provisions of sub-clause (a) of this clause
shall not be applicable for the purpose of allotment of seats in the House of the People to any
State so long as the population of that State does not exceed six millions.
(3) In this article, the expression "population" means the population as ascertained at the last
preceding census of which the relevant figures have been published: Provided that the
reference in this clause to the last preceding census of which the relevant figures have been
published shall, until the relevant figures for the first census taken after the year 2026 have
been published, be construed- (i) for the purposes of sub-clause (a) of clause (2) and the
proviso to that clause, as a reference to the 1971 census; and (ii) for the purpose of sub-clause
(b) of clause (2) as a reference to the 2001 census.
Article 82. Readjustment after each census- Upon the completion of each census, the
allocation of seats in the House of the People to the States and the division of each State into
territorial constituencies shall be readjusted by such authority and in such manner as
Parliament may by law determine: Provided that such readjustment shall not affect
representation in the House of the People until the dissolution of the then existing House;
Provided further that such readjustment shall take effect from such date as the President may,
by order, specify and until such readjustment takes effect, any election to the House may be
held on the basis of the territorial constituencies existing before such readjustment; Provided
also that until the relevant figures for the first census taken after the year 2026 have been
published, it shall not be necessary to readjust: (i) the allocation of seats in the House of the
People to the States as readjusted on the basis of the 1971 census; and (ii) the division of each
State into territorial constituencies as may be readjusted on the basis of the 2001 census,
under this article.
Article 83. Duration of Houses of Parliament(1) The Council of States shall not be subject to dissolution, but as nearly as possible one-third
of the members thereof shall retire as soon as may be on the expiration of every second year in
accordance with the provisions made in that behalf by Parliament by law.
(2) The House of the People, unless sooner dissolved, shall continue for five years from the
date appointed for its first meeting and no longer and the expiration of the said period of five
years shall operate as a dissolution of the House: Provided that the said period may, while a
Proclamation of Emergency is in operation, be extended by Parliament by law for a period not
exceeding one year at a time and not extending in any case beyond a period of six months after
the Proclamation has ceased to operate.
(B) THE STATE LEGISLATURE:
Article 168. Constitution of Legislatures in States1) For every State there shall be a Legislature which shall consist of the Governor, and (a) in
the States of 1***, Bihar 2*** 3-4***, 5[Maharashtra], 6[Karnataka], 7*** 8[and Uttar Pradesh],
two Houses, and (b) in other States, one House.
(2) Where there are two Houses of the Legislature of a State, one shall be known as the
Legislative Council and the other as the Legislative Assembly, and where there is only one
House, it shall be known as the Legislative Assembly.
Article 169. Abolition or creation of Legislative Councils in States(1) Notwithstanding anything in Article 168, Parliament may by law provide for the abolition of
the Legislative Council of a State having such a Council or for the creation of such a Council in
a State having no such Council, if the Legislative Assembly of the State passes a resolution to
that effect by a majority of the total membership of the Assembly and by a majority of not less
than two-thirds of the members of the Assembly present and voting.
(2) Any law referred to in clause (1) shall contain such provisions for the amendment of this
Constitution as may be necessary to give effect to the provisions of the law and may also
contain such supplemental, incidental and consequential provisions as Parliament may deem
necessary.
(3) No such law as aforesaid shall be deemed to be an amendment of this Constitution for the
purposes of Article 368.
Article 170. Composition of the Legislative Assemblies(1) Subject to the provisions of article 333, the Legislative Assembly of each State shall consist
of not more than five hundred, and not less than sixty members chosen by direct election from
territorial constituencies in the State.
(2) For the purposes of clause (1), each State shall be divided into territorial constituencies in
such manner that the ratio between the population of each constituency and the number of
seats allotted to it shall, so far as practicable, be the same throughout the State.
[Explanation—In this clause, the expression "population" means the population as ascertained
at the last preceding census of which the relevant figures have been published: Provided that
the reference in this Explanation to the last preceding census of which the relevant figures
have been published shall, until the relevant figures for the first census taken after the year
2026 have been published, be construed as a reference to the 2001 census.]
(3) Upon the completion of each census, the total number of seats in the Legislative Assembly
of each State and the division of each State into territorial constituencies shall be readjusted
by such authority and in such manner as Parliament may by law determine: Provided that such
readjustment shall not affect representation in the Legislative Assembly until the dissolution of
the then existing Assembly: Provided further that such readjustment shall take effect from
such date as the President may, by order, specify and until such readjustment takes effect, any
election to the Legislative Assembly may be held on the basis of the territorial constituencies
existing before such readjustment: Provided also that until the relevant figures for the first
census taken after the year 2026 have been published, it shall not be necessary to readjust- (i)
the total number of seats in the Legislative Assembly of each State as readjusted on the basis
of the 1971 census; and (ii) the division of such State into territorial constituencies as may be
readjusted on the basis of the 2001 census, under this clause.
Article 171. Composition of the Legislative Councils(1) The total number of members in the Legislative Council of a State having such a Council
shall not exceed one-third of the total number of members in the Legislative Assembly of that
State: Provided that the total number of members in the Legislative Council of a State shall in
no case be less than forty.
(2) Until Parliament by law otherwise provides, the composition of the Legislative Council of a
State shall be as provided in clause (3).
(3) Of the total number of members of the Legislative Council of a State- (a) as nearly as may
be, one-third shall be elected by electorates consisting of members of municipalities, district
boards and such other local authorities in the State as Parliament may by law specify; (b) as
nearly as may be, one-twelfth shall be elected by electorates consisting of persons residing in
the State who have been for at least three years graduates of any university in the territory of
India or have been for at least three years in possession of qualifications prescribed by or under
any law made by Parliament as equivalent to that of a graduate of any such university; (c) as
nearly as may be, one-twelfth shall be elected by electorates consisting of persons who have
been for at least three years engaged in teaching in such educational institutions within the
State, not lower in standard than that of a secondary school, as may be prescribed by or under
any law made by Parliament; (d) as nearly as may be, one-third shall be elected by the
members of the Legislative Assembly of the State from amongst persons who are not members
of the Assembly; and (e) the remainder shall be nominated by the Governor in accordance with
the provisions of clause (5).
(4) The members to be elected under sub-clauses (a), (b) and (c) of clause (3) shall be chosen
in such territorial constituencies as may be prescribed by or under any law made by
Parliament, and the elections under the said sub-clauses and under sub-clause (d) of the said
clause shall be held in accordance with the system of proportional representation by means of
the single transferable vote.
(5) The members to be nominated by the Governor under sub-clause (e) of clause (3) shall
consist of persons having special knowledge or practical experience in respect of such matters
as the following, namely:
Literature, science, art, co-operative movement and social service.
Article 172. Duration of State Legislatures(1) Every Legislative Assembly of every State, unless sooner dissolved, shall continue for five
years from the date appointed for its first meeting and no longer and the expiration of the said
period of five years shall operate as a dissolution of the Assembly: Provided that the said
period may, while a Proclamation of Emergency is in operation, be extended by Parliament by
law for a period not exceeding one year at a time and not extending in any case beyond a
period of six months after the Proclamation has ceased to operate.
(2) The Legislative Council of a State shall not be subject to dissolution, but as nearly as
possible one-third of the members thereof shall retire as soon as may be on the expiration of
every second year in accordance with the provisions made in that behalf by Parliament by law.
(C) THREE-TIER PANCHAYAT RAJ:
In the original Constitution of India, Article 40 dealt with the Three -Tier Panchayat Raj. The
subject matter of Article 40 had been amended vide 73rd Amendment of the Constitution. The
amended subject matter has been put under Article 243.
Article 243. Definitions- In this Part, unless the context otherwise requires,(a) "District" means a district in a State;
(b) "Gram Sabha" means a body consisting of persons registered in the electoral rolls
relating to a village comprised within the area of Panchayat at the village level;
(c) "Intermediate level" means a level between the village and district levels specified by
the Governor of a State by public notification to be the intermediate level for the
purposes of this Part;
(d) "Panchayat" means an institution (by whatever name called) of self-government
constituted under Article 243B, for the rural areas;
(e) "Panchayat area" means the territorial area of a Panchayat;
(f) "Population" means the population as ascertained at the last preceding census of which
the relevant figures have been published;
(g) "Village" means a village specified by the Governor by public notification to be a village
for the purposes of this Part and includes a group of villages so specified.
Article 243A. Gram Sabha- A Gram Sabha may exercise such powers and performs such
functions at the village level as the Legislature of a State may by law, provide.
Article 243B. Constitution of Panchayats(1) There shall be constituted in every State, Panchayats at the village, intermediate and
district levels in accordance with the provisions of this Part.
(2) Notwithstanding anything in clause (1), Panchayats at the intermediate level may not be
constituted in a State having a population not exceeding twenty lakhs.
Article 243C. Composition of Panchayats.(1) Subject to the provisions of this Part, the Legislature of a State may, by law, make
provisions with respect to the composition of Panchayats: Provided that the ratio between the
population of the territorial area of a Panchayat at any level and the number of seats in such
Panchayat to be filled by election shall, so far as practicable, be the same throughout the
State.
(2) All the seats in a Panchayat shall be filled by persons chosen by direct election from
territorial constituencies in the Panchayat area and for this purpose, each Panchayat area shall
be divided into territorial constituencies in such manner that the ratio between the population
of each constituency and the number of seats allotted to it shall, so far as practicable, be the
same throughout the Panchayat area.
(3) The Legislature of a State may, by law, provide for the representation- (a) of the
Chairpersons of the Panchayats at the village level, in the Panchayats at the intermediate level
or, in the case of a State not having Panchayats at the intermediate level, in the Panchayats at
the district level; (b) of the Chairpersons of the Panchayats at the intermediate level, in the
Panchayats at the district level; (c) of the members of the House of the People and the
members of the Legislative Assembly of the State representing constituencies which comprise
wholly or partly a Panchayat area at a level other than the village level, in such Panchayat; and
(d) of the members of the Council of States and the members of the Legislative Council of the
State, where they are registered as electors within- (i) a Panchayat area at the intermediate
level, in Panchayat at the intermediate level, and (ii) a Panchayat area at the district level, in
Panchayat at the district level.
(4) The Chairperson of a Panchayat and other members of a Panchayat whether or not chosen
by direct election from territorial constituencies in the Panchayat area shall have the right to
vote in the meetings of the Panchayats.
(5) The Chairperson of- (a) a Panchayat at the village level shall be elected in such manner as
the Legislature of a State may, by law, provide; and (b) a Panchayat at the intermediate level
or district level shall be elected by, and from amongst, the elected members thereof.
Article 243D. Reservation of seats(1) Seats shall be reserved for- (a) the Scheduled Castes; and (b) the Scheduled Tribes, in every
Panchayat and the number of seats so reserved shall bear, as nearly as may be, the same
proportion to the total number of seats to be filled by direct election in that Panchayat as the
population of the Scheduled Castes in that Panchayat area or of the Scheduled Tribes in that
Panchayat area bears to the total population of that area and such seats may be allotted by
rotation to different constituencies in a Panchayat.
(2) Not less than one-third of the total number of seats reserved under clause (1) shall be
reserved for women belonging to the Scheduled Castes or, as the case may be, the Scheduled
Tribes.
(3) Not less than one-third (including the number of seats reserved for women belonging to the
Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes) of the total number of seats to be filled by direct
election in every Panchayat shall be reserved for women and such seats may be allotted by
rotation to different constituencies in a Panchayat.
(4) The offices of the Chairpersons in the Panchayats at the village or any other level shall be
reserved for the Scheduled Castes, the Scheduled Tribes and women in such manner as the
Legislature of a State may, by law, provide: Provided that the number of offices of
Chairpersons reserved for the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes in the Panchayats at
each level in any State shall bear, as nearly as may be, the same proportion to the total
number of such offices in the Panchayats at each level as the population of the Scheduled
Castes in the State or of the Scheduled Tribes in the State bears to the total population of the
State: Provided further that not less than one-third of the total number of offices of
Chairpersons in the Panchayats at each level shall be reserved for women: Provided also that
the number of offices reserved under this clause shall be allotted by rotation to different
Panchayats at each level.
(5) The reservation of seats under clauses (1) and (2) and the reservation of offices of
Chairpersons (other than the reservation for women) under clause (4) shall cease to have effect
on the expiration of the period specified in Article 334.
(6) Nothing in this Part shall prevent the Legislature of a State from making any provision for
reservation of seats in any Panchayat or offices of Chairpersons in the Panchayats at any level
in favor of backward class of citizens.
Article 243E. Duration of Panchayats etc.(1) Every Panchayat, unless sooner dissolved under any law for the time being in force, shall
continue for five years from the date appointed for its first meeting and no longer.
(2) No amendment of any law for the time being in force shall have the effect of causing
dissolution of a Panchayat at any level, which is functioning immediately before such
amendment, till the expiration of its duration specified in clause (1).
(3) An election to constitute a Panchayat shall be completed- (a} before the expiry of its
duration specified in clause (1); and (b) before the expiration of a period of six months from
the date of its dissolution: Provided that where the remainder of the period for which the
dissolved Panchayat would have continued is less than six months, it shall not be necessary to
hold any election under this clause for constituting the Panchayat for such period.
(4) A Panchayat constituted upon the dissolution of a Panchayat before the expiration of its
duration shall continue only for the remainder of the period for which the dissolved Panchayat
would have continued under clause (1) had it not been so dissolved.
II. POLITICAL PARTIES:
India has a multi-party system and politics is dominated by several national and regional
parties.
Section 29A: Registration with the Election Commission of Associations and Bodies as Political
Parties –
(1) Any association or body of individual citizens of India calling itself a political party and
intending to avail itself of the provisions of this Part shall make an application to the Election
Commission for its registration as a political party for the purposes of this Act.
(2) Every such application shall be made- (a) if the association or body is in existence at the
commencement of the Representation of the People (Amendment) Act, 1988 (1 of 1989), within
sixty days next following such commencement, and (b) if the association or body is formed
after such commencement, within thirty days next following the date of its formation.
(3) Every application under sub-section (1) shall be signed by the chief executive officer of the
association or body (whether such chief executive officer is known as Secretary or by any other
designation) and presented to the Secretary to the Commission or sent to such Secretary by
registered post.
(4) Every such application shall contain the following particulars, namely- (a) the name of the
association or body; (b) the State in which its head office is situated; (c) the address to which
letters and other communications meant for it should be sent; (d) the names of its president,
secretary, treasurer and other office bearers; (e) the numerical strength of its members, and if
there are categories of its members, the numerical strength in each category; (f) whether it
has any local units; if so, at what levels; and (g) whether it is represented by any member or
members in either House of Parliament or of any State Legislature; if so, the number of such
member or members.
(5) The application under sub-section (1) shall be accompanied by a copy of the memorandum
or rules and regulations of the association or body, by whatever name called, and such
memorandum or rules and regulations shall contain a specific provision that the association or
body shall bear true faith and allegiance to the Constitution of India as by law established, and
to the principles of socialism, secularism and democracy, and would uphold the sovereignty,
unity and integrity of India.
(6) The Commission may call for such other particulars as it may deem fit from the association
or body.
(7) After considering all the particulars as aforesaid in its possession and any other necessary
and relevant factors and after giving the representatives of the association or body reasonable
opportunity of being heard, the Commission shall decide either to register the association or
body as a political party for the purposes of this Part, or not so to register it; and the
Commission shall communicate its decision to the association or body: Provided that no
association or body shall be registered as a political party under this sub-section unless the
memorandum or rules and regulations of such association or body conform to the provisions of
sub-section(5).
(8) The decision of the Commission shall be final.
(9) After an association or body has been registered as a political party as aforesaid, any
change in its name, head office, office-bearers, address or in any other material matters shall
be communicated to the Commission without delay.
III. EXISTING PROCEDURE FOR ELECTION:
A. QUALIFICATION:
(a) Member of Parliament
Article 84. Qualification for membership of Parliament- A person shall not be qualified to be
chosen to fill a seat in Parliament unless he- (a) is a citizen of India, and makes and subscribes
before some person authorized in that behalf by the Election Commission an oath or
affirmation according to the form set out for the purpose in the Third Schedule; (b) is, in the
case of a seat in the Council of Sates, not less than thirty years of age and, in the case of a
seat in the House of the People, not less than twenty-five years of age, and (c) possesses such
other qualifications as may be prescribed in that behalf by or under any law made by
Parliament.
(b) Member of State Legislature
Article 173. Qualification for membership of the State Legislature- A person shall not be
qualified to be chosen to fill a seat in the Legislature of a State unless he- (a) is a citizen of
India, and makes and subscribes before some person authorised in that behalf by the Election
Commission an oath or affirmation according to the form set out for the purpose in the Third
Schedule; (b) is, in the case of a seat in the Legislative Assembly, not less than twenty-five
years of age and, in the case of a seat in the Legislative Council, not less than thirty years of
age; and (c) possesses such other qualifications as may be prescribed in that behalf by or under
any law made by Parliament.
B. PROCEDURE IN BRIEF:
Section- 13D of the Representation of the People Act 1950. Electoral rolls for parliamentary
constituencies(1) The electoral roll for every parliamentary constituency, other than a parliamentary
constituency in the State of Jammu and Kashmir or in a Union territory not having a Legislative
Assembly, shall consist of the electoral rolls for all the assembly constituencies comprised
within that parliamentary constituency; and it shall not be necessary to prepare or revise
separately the electoral roll for any such parliamentary constituency: Provided that for the
period referred to in clause (2) of Article 371A, it shall be necessary to prepare and revise
separately the electoral roll for that part of the parliamentary constituency of Nagaland which
comprises the Tuensang district and the provisions of Part III shall apply in relation to the
preparation and revision of the electoral roll of the said part as they apply in relation to an
assembly constituency.
(2) The provisions of Part III shall apply in relation to every parliamentary constituency in the
State of Jammu and Kashmir or in a Union territory not having a Legislative Assembly as they
apply in relation to an assembly constituency.
Section- 15 of the Representation of the People Act 1950. Electoral roll for every constituencyFor every constituency there shall be an electoral roll which shall be prepared in accordance
with the provisions of this Act under the superintendence, direction and control of the Election
Commission.
Section- 14 of the Representation of the People Act 1951. Notification for general election to
the House of the People(1) A general election shall be held for the purpose of constituting a new House of the People
on the expiration of the duration of the existing House or on its dissolution.
(2) For the said purpose the President shall, by one or more notifications published in the
Gazette of India on such date or dates as may be recommended by the Election Commission
call upon all Parliamentary constituencies to elect members in accordance with the provisions
of this Act and of the rules and orders made there under: Provided that where a general
election is held otherwise than on the dissolution of the existing House of the People, no such
notification shall be issued at any time earlier than six months prior to the date on which the
duration of that House would expire under the provisions of clause (2) of Article 83.
Section-14A of the Representation of the People Act 1951. Notification for electing the
representative of the State of Sikkim to the existing House of the People- For the purpose of
electing a representative of the State of Sikkim to the House of the People, specified in clause
(e) of Article 371F of the Constitution, the Election Commission shall call upon the members of
the Legislative Assembly of the State of Sikkim to elect the representative in accordance with
such of the provisions of this Act, and the rules and orders make there under, as are applicable
to the election of the members of the Council of States.
Section- 15 of the Representation of the People Act 1951. Notification for general election
to a State Legislative Assembly(1) A general election shall be held for the purpose of constituting a new Legislative Assembly
on the expiration of the duration of the existing Assembly or on its dissolution.
(2) For the said purpose, the Governor or Administrator, as the case may be, shall by one or
more notifications published in the Official Gazette of the State on such date or dates as may
be recommended by the Election Commission, call upon all Assembly constituencies in the
State to elect members in accordance with the provisions of this Act and of the rules and
orders made there under: Provided that where a general election is held otherwise than on the
dissolution of the existing Legislative Assembly, no such notification shall be issued at any time
earlier than six months prior to the date on which the duration of that Assembly would expire
under the provisions of clause (1) of Article 172 or under the provisions of section 5 of the
Government of Union Territories Act, 1963 (20 of 1963), as the case may be.
Section- 30 of the Representation of the People Act 1951. Appointment of dates for
nominations, etc.- As soon as the notification calling upon a constituency to elect a member or
members is issued, the Election Commission shall, by notification in the Official Gazette,
appoint- (a) the last date for making nominations, which shall be the seventh day after the
date of publication of the first mentioned notification or, if that day is a public holiday, the
next succeeding day which is not a public holiday; (b) the date for the scrutiny of nominations,
which shall be the day immediately following the last date for making nominations or, if that
day is a public holiday, the next succeeding day which is not a public holiday; (c) the last date
for the withdrawal of candidatures, which shall be the second day after the date for the
scrutiny of nominations or, if that day is a public holiday, the next succeeding day which is not
a public holiday; (d) the date or dates on which a poll shall, if necessary, be taken, which or
the first of which shall be a date not earlier than the fourteenth day after the last date for the
withdrawal of candidatures; and the date before which the election shall be completed.
Section- 31 of the Representation of the People Act 1951. Public notice of election- On the
issue of a notification under section 30, the returning officer shall give public notice of the
intended election in such form and manner as may be prescribed, inviting nominations of
candidates for such election and specifying the place at which the nomination papers are to be
delivered.
Section- 32 of the Representation of the People Act 1951. Nomination of candidates for
election- Any person may be nominated as a candidate for election fill a seat if he is qualified
to be chosen to fill that seat under the provisions of the Constitution and this Act or under the
provisions of the Government of Union Territories Act, 1963 (20 of 1963), as the case may be.
Section- 33 of the Representation of the People Act 1951. Presentation of nomination
paper and requirements for a valid nomination- (1) On or before the date appointed under
clause (a) of section 30 each candidate shall, either in person or by his proposer, between the
hours of eleven O'clock in the forenoon and three O'clock in the afternoon deliver to the
returning officer at the place specified in this behalf in the notice issued under section 31 a
nomination paper completed in the prescribed form and signed by the candidate and by an
elector of the constituency as proposer: Provided that a candidate not set up by a recognized
political party, shall not be deemed to be duly nominated for election from a constituency
unless the nomination paper is subscribed by ten proposers being electors of the constituency:
Provided further that no nomination paper shall be delivered to the returning officer on a day
which is a public holiday: Provided also that in the case of a local authorities' constituency,
graduates' constituency or teachers' constituency, the reference to "an elector of the
constituency as proposer" shall be construed as a reference to ten per cent, of the electors of
the constituency or ten such electors, whichever is less, as proposers.
(1A) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1), for election to the Legislative
Assembly of Sikkim (deemed to be the Legislative Assembly of that State only constituted under
the Constitution), the nomination paper to be delivered to the returning officer shall be in such
form and manner as may be prescribed: Provided that the said nomination paper shall be
subscribed by the candidate as assenting to the nomination, and (a) in the case of a seat
reserved for Sikkimese of Bhutia-Lepcha origin, also by at least twenty electors of the
constituency as proposers and twenty electors of the constituency as seconders; (b) in the case
of a seat reserved for Sanghas, also by at least twenty electors of the constituency as proposers
and at least twenty electors of the constituency as seconders, and (c) in the case of a seat
reserved for Sikkimese of Nepali origin, by an elector of the constituency as proposer: Provided
further that no nomination paper shall be delivered to the returning officer on a day which is a
public holiday.
(2) In a constituency where any seat is reserved, a candidate shall not be deemed to be
qualified to be chosen to fill that seat unless his nomination paper contains a declaration by
him specifying the particular caste or tribe of which he is a member and the area in relation to
which that caste or tribe is a Scheduled Caste or, as the case may be, a Scheduled Tribe of the
State.
(3) Where the candidate is a person who, having held any office referred to in section 9 has
been dismissed and a period of five years has not elapsed since the dismissal, such person shall
not be deemed to be duly nominated as a candidate unless his nomination paper is
accompanied by a certificate issued in the prescribed manner by the Election Commission to
the effect that he has not been dismissed for corruption or disloyalty to the State.
(4) On the presentation of a nomination paper, the returning officer shall satisfy himself that
the names and electoral roll numbers of the candidate and his proposer as entered in the
nomination paper are the same as those entered in the electoral rolls: Provided that no
misnomer or inaccurate description or clerical, technical or printing error in regard to the
name of the candidate or his proposer or any other person, or in regard to any place,
mentioned in the electoral roll or the nomination paper and no clerical, technical or printing
error in regard to the electoral roll numbers of any such person in the electoral roll or the
nomination paper, shall affect the full operation of the electoral roll or the nomination paper
with respect to such person or place in any case where the description in regard to the name of
the person or place is such as to be commonly understood; and the returning officer shall
permit any such misnomer or inaccurate description or clerical, technical or printing error to
be corrected and where necessary, direct that any such misnomer, inaccurate description,
clerical, technical or printing error in the electoral roll or in the nomination paper shall be
overlooked.
(5) Where the candidate is an elector of a different constituency, a copy of the electoral roll of
that constituency or of the relevant part thereof or a certified copy of the relevant entries in
such roll shall, unless it has been filed along with the nomination paper, be produced before
the returning officer at the time of scrutiny.
(6) Nothing in this section shall prevent any candidate from being nominated by more than one
nomination paper: Provided that not more than four nomination papers shall be presented by
or on behalf of any candidate or accepted by the returning officer for election in the same
constituency.
(7) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (6) or in any other provisions of this Act,
a person shall not be nominated as a candidate for election (a) in the case of a general election
to the House of the People (whether or not held simultaneously from all Parliamentary
constituencies), from more than two Parliamentary constituencies; (b) in the case of a general
election to the Legislative Assembly of a State (whether or not held simultaneously from all
Assembly constituencies), from more than two Assembly constituencies in that State; (c) in the
case of a biennial election to the Legislative Council of a State having such Council, from more
than two Council constituencies in the State; (d) in the case of a biennial election to the
Council of States for filling two or more seats allotted to a State, for filling more than two such
seats; (e) in the case of bye-elections to the House of the People from two or more
Parliamentary constituencies which are held simultaneously, from more than two such
Parliamentary constituencies; (f) in the case of bye-elections to the Legislative Assembly of a
State from two or more Assembly constituencies which are held simultaneously, from more
than two such Assembly constituencies; (g) in the case of bye-elections to the Council of States
for filling two or more seats allotted to a State, which are held simultaneously, for filling more
than two such seats; and (h) in the case of bye-elections to the Legislative Council of a State
having such Council from two or more Council constituencies which are held simultaneously,
from more than two such Council constituencies.
Section- 34 of the Representation of the People Act 1951. Deposits(1) A candidate shall not be deemed to be duly nominated for election from a constituency
unless he deposits or causes to be deposited- (a) in the case of an election from a
Parliamentary constituency, a sum of ten thousand rupees or where the candidate is a member
of a Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe, a sum of five thousand rupees; and (b) in the case of
an election from an Assembly or Council constituency, a sum of five thousand rupees or where
the candidate is a member of a Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe, a sum of two thousand
five hundred rupees: Provided that where a candidate has been nominated by more than one
nomination paper for election in the same constituency, not more than one deposit shall be
required of him under this sub-section.
(2) Any sum required to be deposited under sub-section (1) shall not be deemed to have been
deposited under that sub-section unless at the time of delivery of the nomination paper under
sub-section (1) or, as the case may be, sub-section (1A) of section 33, the candidate has either
deposited or caused to be deposited that sum with the returning officer in cash or enclosed
with the nomination paper a receipt showing that the said sum has been deposited by him or on
his behalf in the Reserve Bank of India or in a Government Treasury.
Section- 35 of the Representation of the People Act 1951. Notice of nominations and the
time and place for their scrutiny- The returning officer shall, on receiving the nomination
paper under sub-section (1) or, as the case may be, sub-section (1A) of section 33, inform the
person or persons delivering the same of the date, time and place fixed for the scrutiny of
nominations and shall enter on the nomination paper its serial number, and shall sign thereon a
certificate stating the date on which and the hour at which the nomination paper has been
delivered to him; and shall, as soon as may be thereafter, cause to be affixed in some
conspicuous place in his office a notice of the nomination containing descriptions similar to
those contained in the nomination paper, both of the candidate and of the proposer.
Section- 36 of the Representation of the People Act 1951. Scrutiny of nomination1) On the date fixed for the scrutiny of nominations under section 30, the candidates, their
election agents, one proposer of each candidate, and one other person duly authorized in
writing by each candidate but no other person, may attend at such time and place as the
returning officer may appoint; and the returning officer shall give them all reasonable facilities
for examining the nomination papers of all candidates which have been delivered within the
time and in the manner laid down in section 33.
(2) The returning officer shall then examine the nomination papers and shall decide all
objections which may be made to any nomination and may, either on such objection or on his
own motion, after such summary inquiry, if any, as he thinks necessary, reject any nomination
on any of the following grounds:- (a) that on the date fixed for the scrutiny of nominations the
candidate either is not qualified or is disqualified for being chosen to fill the seat under any of
the following provisions that may be applicable, namely:- Articles 84, 102, 173 and 191, Part II
of this Act, and sections 4 and 14 of the Government of Union Territories Act, 1963 (20 of
1963); or (b) that there has been a failure to comply with any of the provisions of section 33 or
section 34; or (c) that the signature of the candidate or the proposer on the nomination paper
is not genuine.
(3) Nothing contained in clause (b) or clause (c) of sub-section (2) shall be deemed to authorize
the rejection of the nomination of any candidate on the ground of any irregularity in respect of
a nomination paper, if the candidate has been duly nominated by means of another nomination
paper in respect of which no irregularity has been committed.
(4) The returning officer shall not reject any nomination paper on the ground of any defect
which is not of a substantial character.
(5) The returning officer shall hold the scrutiny on the date appointed in this behalf under
clause (b) of section 30 and shall not allow any adjournment of the proceedings except when
such proceedings are interrupted or obstructed by riot or open violence or by causes beyond his
control: Provided that in case an objection is raised by the returning officer or is made by any
other person, the candidate concerned may be allowed time to rebut it not later than the next
day but one following the date fixed for scrutiny, and the returning officer shall record his
decision on the date to which the proceedings have been adjourned.
(6) The returning officer shall endorse on each nomination paper his decision accepting or
rejecting the same and, if the nomination paper is rejected, shall record in writing a brief
statement of his reasons for such rejection.
(7) For the purposes of this section, a certified copy of an entry in the electoral roll for the
time being in force of a constituency shall be conclusive evidence of the fact that the person
referred to in that entry is an elector for that constituency, unless it is proved that he is
subject to a disqualification mentioned in section 16 of the Representation of the People Act,
1950 (43 of 1950).
(8) Immediately after all the nomination papers have been scrutinized and decisions accepting
or rejecting the same have been recorded, the returning officer shall prepare a list of validly
nominated candidates, that is to say, candidates whose nominations have been found valid,
and affix it to his notice board.
Section- 37 of the Representation of the People Act 1951. Withdrawal of candidature(1) Any candidate may withdraw his candidature by a notice in writing which shall contain such
particulars as may be prescribed and shall be subscribed by him and delivered before three
O'clock in the afternoon on the day fixed under clause (c) of section 30 to the returning officer
either by such candidate in person or by his proposer, or election agent who has been
authorized in this behalf in writing by such candidate.
(2) No person who has given a notice of withdrawal of his candidature under sub-section (1)
shall be allowed to cancel the notice.
(3) The returning officer shall, on being satisfied as to the genuineness of a notice or
withdrawal and the identity of the person delivering it under sub-section (1), cause the notice
to be affixed in some conspicuous place in his office.
Section- 38 of the Representation of the People Act 1951. Publication of list of contesting
candidates(1) Immediately after the expiry of the period within which candidatures may be withdrawn
under sub-section (1) of section 37, the returning officer shall prepare and publish in such form
and manner as may be prescribed a list of contesting candidates, that is to say, candidates who
were included in the list of validly nominated candidates and who have not withdrawn their
candidature within the said period.
(2) For the purpose of listing the names under sub-section (1), the candidates shall be classified
as follows, namely: (i) candidates of recognized political parties; (ii) candidates of registered
political parties other than those mentioned in clause (i); (iii) other candidates.
(3) The categories mentioned in sub-section (2) shall be arranged in the order specified therein
and the names of candidates in each category shall be arranged in alphabetical order and the
addresses of the contesting candidates as given in the nomination papers together with such
other particulars as may be prescribed.
Section- 56 of the Representation of the People Act 1951. Fixing time for poll- The Election
Commission shall fix the hours during which the poll will be taken; and the hours so fixed shall
be published in such manner as may be prescribed: Provided that the total period allotted on
any one day for polling at an election in a Parliamentary or Assembly constituency shall not be
less than eight hours.
Section- 57 of the Representation of the People Act 1951. Adjournment of poll in
emergencies(1) If at an election the proceedings at any polling station provided under section 25 or at the
place fixed under sub-section (1) of section 29 for the poll are interrupted or obstructed by any
riot or open violence, or if at an election it is not possible to take the poll at any polling station
or such place on account of any natural calamity, or any other sufficient cause the presiding
officer for such polling station or the returning officer presiding over such place, as the case
may be, shall announce an adjournment of the poll to a date to be notified later, and where
the poll is so adjourned by a presiding officer, he shall forthwith inform the returning officer
concerned.
(2) Whenever a poll is adjourned under sub-section (1), the returning officer shall immediately
report the circumstances to the appropriate authority and the Election Commission and shall,
as soon as may be, with the previous approval of the Election Commission appoint the day on
which the poll shall recommence, and fix the polling station or place at which, and the hours
during which, the poll will be taken, and shall not count the votes cast at such election until
such adjourned poll shall have been completed.
(3) In every such case as aforesaid the returning officer shall notify in such manner as the
Election Commission may direct the date, place and hours of polling fixed under sub-section
(2).
Section- 59 of the Representation of the People Act 1951. Manner of voting at elections- At
every election where a poll is taken votes shall be given by ballot in such manner as may be
prescribed and, save as expressly provided by this Act, no votes shall be received by proxy:
Provided that the votes at every election to fill a seat or seats in the Council of States shall be
given by open ballot.
Section- 60 of the Representation of the People Act 1951. Special procedure for voting by
certain classes of persons- Without prejudice to the generality of the provisions contained in
section 59, provision may be made, by rules made under this Act, for enabling- (a) any of the
persons as is referred to in clause (a) or clause (b) of sub-section (8) of section 20 of the
Representation of the People Act, 1950 (43 of 1950), hereafter in this section referred to as the
1950 Act to give his vote either in person or by postal ballot or by proxy, and not in any other
manner, at an election in a constituency where poll is taken; (b) any of the following persons
to give his vote either in person or by postal ballot, and not in any other manner, at an election
in a constituency where a poll is taken, namely:- (i) any person as is referred to in clause (c) or
clause (d) of sub-section (8) of section 20 of the 1950-Act; (ii) the wife of any such person to
whom the provisions of sub-section (3) of section 20 of the 1950 Act apply and such wife being
ordinarily residing with that person in terms of sub-section (6) of that section; (c) any person
belonging to a class of persons notified by the Election Commission in consultation with the
Government to give his vote by postal ballot and not in any other manner, at an election in a
constituency where a poll is taken subject to the fulfillment of such requirements as may be
specified in those rules; (d) any person subjected to preventive detention under any law for the
time being in force to give his vote by postal ballot, and not in any other manner, at an
election in a constituency where a poll is taken, subject to the fulfillment of such requirements
as may be specified in those rules.
Section- 65 of the Representation of the People Act 1951. Equality of votes- If, after the
counting of the votes is completed, an equality of votes is found to exist between any
candidates, and the addition of one vote will entitle any of those candidates to be declared
elected, the returning officer shall forthwith decide between those candidates by lot, and
proceed as if the candidate on whom the lot falls had received an additional vote.
Section- 66 of the Representation of the People Act 1951. Declaration of results- When the
counting of the votes has been completed, the returning officer shall, in the absence of any
direction by the Election Commission to the contrary, forthwith declare the result of the
election in the manner provided by this Act or the rules made there under.
Section- 67 of the Representation of the People Act 1951. Report of the result- As soon as
may be after the result of an election has been declared, the returning officer shall report the
result to the appropriate authority and the Election Commission, and in the case of an election
to a House of Parliament or of the Legislature of a State also to the Secretary of that House,
and the appropriate authority shall cause to be published in the Official Gazette the
declarations containing the names of the elected candidates.
Section- 67A of the Representation of the People Act 1951. Date of election of candidateFor the purposes of this Act, the date on which candidate is declared by the returning officer
under the provisions of section 53, or section 66, to be elected to a House of Parliament or of
the Legislature of a State shall be the date of election of that candidate.
Section- 77 of the Representation of the People Act 1951. Election Expenses permissible during
election are as under:
TABLE
S.
No.
I.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
Name of State or
Union territory
STATES
Andhra Pradesh
Arunachal Pradesh
Assam
Bihar
Goa
Gujarat
Haryana
Himachal Pradesh
Jammu & Kashmir
Karnataka
Kerala
Madhya Pradesh
Maharashtra
Manipur
Meghalaya
Mizoram
Nagaland
Orissa
Punjab
Rajasthan
Sikkim
Tamil Nadu
Tripura
Uttar Pradesh
West Bengal
Chattisgarh
Uttaranchal
Jharkhand
Maximum limit of election
expenses in any one
Parliamentary
constituency
Rs.
25,00,000
17,00,000
25,00,000
25,00,000
14,00,000
25,00,000
25,00,000
25,00,000
25,00,000
25,00,000
25,00,000
25,00,000
25,00,000
22,00,000
22,00,000
20,00,000
25,00,000
25,00,000
25,00,000
25,00,000
17,00,000
25,00,000
25,00,000
25,00,000
25,00,000
25,00,000
25,00,000
25,00,000
Assembly
constituency
Rs.
10,00,000
6,00,000
10,00,000
10,00,000
5,00,000
10,00,000
10,00,000
7,00,000
—
10,00,000
10,00,000
10,00,000
10,00,000
5,00,000
5,00,000
5,00,000
5,00,000
10,00,000
10,00,000
10,00,000
5,00,000
10,00,000
5,00,000
10,00,000
10,00,000
10,00,000
7,00,000
10,00,000
II. UNION TERRITORIES
1.
Andaman &Nicobar Islands
2.
Chandigarh
3.
Dadra and Nagar Haveli
4.
Daman and Diu
5.
Delhi
6.
Lakshadweep
7.
Pondicherry
17,00,000
14,00,000
10,00,000
10,00,000
25,00,000
10,00,000
20,00,000
—
—
—
—
9,00,000
—
5,00,000
IV. GUIDELINES:
In order to examine and ensure democratic validity of evolution, constitution, operation and
amendment of the institutional structure of governance, Indian Constitution has provided
number of guidelines under Preamble, Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles of State
Policy. The following lines give brief idea about some of these guidelines.
The Preamble to the Constitution emphasizes the principles of Justice, social, economic and
political; Liberty of thought, expression, belief, faith and worship; Equality of status and of
opportunity and to promote among them all Fraternity assuring the dignity of the individual
and the unity and integrity of the nation.
Right to Shelter, Right to Equality, Prohibition of Discrimination on Grounds of Religion, Race,
Caste, Sex or Place of Birth; Equality of Opportunity in Matters of Public Employment; Abolition
of Untouchability; Abolution of Titles; Protection of Certain Rights Regarding Freedom of
Speech etc.; Protection in Respect of Conviction for Offences; Protection of Life and Personal
Liberty; Right to Education; Protection Against Arrest and Detention in Some Cases; Prohibition
of Traffic in Human Beings and Forced Labour; Prohibition of Employment of Children in
Factories etc.; Freedom of Conscience and Free Profession, Practice and Propagation of
Religion; Freedom to Manage Religious Affairs; Freedom as to Payment of Taxes for Promotion
of any Particular Religion; Freedom as to Attendance at Religious Instruction or Religious
Worship in Certain Educational Institutions; Protection of Interests of Minorities; Right of
Minorities to Establish and Administer Educational Institutions; Saving of Laws Providing for
Acquisition of Estates etc.; Validation of Certain Acts and Regulations; Saving of Laws Giving
Effect to Certain Directive Principles; Remedies for Enforcement of Rights Conferred by This
Part; Power of Parliament to Modify the Rights Conferred by This Part in Their Application to
Forces etc.; Restriction on Rights Conferred by This Part which Martial Law is Inforce in any
Area and Legislation to Give Effect to the Provision of This Part, constitute Fundamental Rights
provided by the Constitution of India to the Indian citizens.
State to secure a social order for the promotion of welfare of the people; Certain principles of
policy to be followed by the State; Equal justice and free legal aid; Organisation of village
panchayats; Right to work, to education and to public assistance in certain cases; Provision for
just and humane conditions of work and maternity relief; Living wage, etc. for workers;
Participation of workers in management of industries; Uniform civil code for the citizens;
Provision for early childhood care and education to children below the age of six years;
Promotion of educational and economic interests of Schedule Castes, Scheduled Tribes and
other weaker sections; Duty of the State to raise the level of nutrition and the standard of
living and to improve public health; Organisation of agriculture and animal husbandry;
Protection and improvement of environment and safeguarding of forests and wild life;
Protection of monuments and places and objects of national importance; Separation of
judiciary from executive and Promotion of international peace and security, constitute the
Directive Principles of State Policy included in Part IV of the Constitution.
V. POWER OF AMENDMENT:
Article 368. Power of Parliament to amend the Constitution and procedure therefor- (1)
Notwithstanding anything in this Constitution, Parliament may in exercise of its constituent
power amend by way of addition, variation or repeal any provision of this Constitution in
accordance with the procedure laid down in this article.
(2) An amendment of this Constitution may be initiated only by the introduction of a Bill for
the purpose in either House of Parliament, and when the Bill is passed in each House by a
majority of the total membership of that House and by a majority of not less than two-thirds of
the members of that House present and voting, it shall be presented to the President who shall
give his assent to the Bill and thereupon the Constitution shall stand amended in accordance
with the terms of the Bill: Provided that if such amendment seeks to make any change in- (a)
Article 54, Article 55, Article 73, Article 162 or Article 241, or (b) Chapter IV of Part V, Chapter
V of Part VI, or Chapter I of Part XI, or (c) any of the Lists in the Seventh Schedule, or (d) the
representation of States in Parliament, or (e) the provisions of this Article, the amendment
shall also require to be ratified by the Legislatures of not less than one-half of the States by
resolutions to that effect passed by those Legislatures before the Bill making provisions for
such amendment is presented to the President for assent.
(3) Nothing in Article 13 shall apply to any amendment made under this article.
(4) No amendment of this Constitution including the provisions of Part III made or purporting to
have been made under this Article whether before or after the commencement of section 55 of
the Constitution (Forty-second Amendment) Act, 1976 shall be called in question in any court
on any ground.
(5) For the removal of doubts, it is hereby declared that there shall be no limitation whatever
on the constituent power of Parliament to amend by way of addition, variation or repeal the
provisions of this Constitution under this Article.
VI. CONCLUSION:
For implementing Democratic Republic in independent India, the Constitution of India adopted
the combination of multi-party based five-tier centralized top-to-bottom institutional structure
of governance......... constituted [election of members of Lok Sabha and State
Assemblies]......... neither as per 'Rule of Majority Vote' nor as per 'Rule of Maximum Vote' but
as per "the first- past-the post" system......... operated......... by the opportunists.
CHAPTER - 3
INTELLECTUALS COMMENTARY
Necessity is the mother of invention. Necessity to end monarchy and dynastic rule gave birth to
democracy and Democratic Republic. "The expression 'democratic republic' refers to the
political participation of the people in running the administration of the Government. It
conveys the state of affairs in which each citizen is assumed of the right of equal participation
in the polity. The expression has been used in this sense, both in the Indian Constitution and by
the people of Sikkim as their goal to achieve. The repeated emphasis that was given to the rule
one man one vote in the various documents preceding Sikkim's merger with India, clearly
defines the system of government which the people of Sikkim by an overwhelming majority
decided to establish and which was exactly the same as under the Indian Constitution. This goal
cannot be achieved by merely alloting each person one vote which they can cast in favour of a
particular candidate or a special group of persons, selected for this purpose by others, in which
they have no say. The result in such a case would be that while one man of this class is
assigned the strength of one full vote, others have to be content with only a fraction. If there
is 90 per cent reservation in the seats of a House in favour of 10 per cent of the population in
the State, and only the remaining 10 per cent of the seats are left to the majority population,
then the principle of adult suffrage as included in Article 326 is sacrificed. By permitting the 90
per cent of the population to vote not only for 10 per cent seats available to them, but also for
the 90 per cent reserved seats the basic flaw going to the root of the matter is not cured. The
choice of the candidate and right to stand as a candidate at the election are inherent in the
principle of adult suffrage, that is, one man one vote. By telling the people that they have a
choice to elect any of a select group cannot be treated as a free choice of the candidate. This
will only amount to lip-service, too thinly veiled to conceal the reality of an oligarchy
underneath. It will be just an apology for democracy; a subterfuge; and if it is permitted to
cross the limit so as to violate the very core of the principle of one man one vote, and is not
controlled by the constitutional safeguards as included in clause [3] of Article 332 it will
amount to a huge fraud perpetrated against the people. The very purpose of providing
reservation in favour of a weaker class is to aid the elemental principle of democracy based on
one man one vote to succeed. The disproportionately excessive reservation creates a privileged
class, not brought to the same plane with others but put on a higher pedestal, causing
unhealthy competition, creating hatred and distrust between classes and fostering divisive
force" (Basu, 2007).
For blocking the continuation of dynastic rule and implementing the Democratic Republic in
independent India, through Constitution and the Representation of the People Acts 1950 and
1951, the Constituent Assembly evolved a combination of multi-party based five-tier
centralized top-to-bottom institutional structure of governance…….. constituted……. as per 'the
first-past-the post' and 'Rule of Majority Vote' based procedure for election……. operated……..
by the opportunists. The working of the Indian Constitution is directly and proportionately
related to the working of this combination. The following lines explain the intellectuals'
commentary on (I) Constitution Itself; (ii) Legislators-Obvious Outcome of the Combination; (iii)
Working of the Political Parties; (iv) Working of the Procedure for Election; and (v) Working of
the Institutional Structure of Governance.
I. COMMENTARY ON CONSTITUTION ITSELF:
Let us start with the opinions of two very prominent members of the Constituent Assembly,
namely, Dr. Rajendra Prasad and Dr. B.R. Ambedkar on the working of the Constitution of India
in future.
"Whatever the Constitution may or may not provide, the welfare of the country will depend
upon the way in which the country is administered. That will depend upon the men who
administer it….. a Constitution, like a machine, is a lifeless thing. It acquires life because of
the men who control it and operate it, and India needs today nothing more than a set of honest
men who will have the interest of the country before them" (Dr. Rajendra Prasad, quoted by
Verma, 2006).
"I feel, however good a Constitution may be, it is sure to turn out bad because those who are
called to work, happen to be a bad lot….. The working of the Constitution does not depend
wholly upon the nature of the Constitution. The Constitution can provide only the organs of
State such as the legislature, the executive and the judiciary. The factors on which the working
of those organs of the state depend on the people and the political parties, they will set up as
their instruments to carry out their wishes and their politics. Who can say how the people of
India and their parties will behave?
He continued. On 26 January, 1950, India will be an independent country. What would happen
to her independence? Will she maintain her independence or will she lose it again? This is the
first thought that comes to my mind… It is this thought makes me most anxious for the future.
What perturbs me greatly is the fact that not only India has once before lost her independence,
but she lost it by the infidelity and treachery of some of her own people. In the invasion of Sind
by Mahommed-Bin-Kasim, the military commanders of King Dahar accepted bribes from the
agents of Mahommed-Bin-Kasim and refused to fight on the side of their King. It was Jaichand
who invited Mohammed Ghori to invade India and fight against Prithvi Raj and promised him
the help of himself and the Solanki Kings….. Will history repeat itself? It is this thought which
fills me with anxiety. The anxiety is deepened by the realisation of the fact that in addition to
our old enemies in the form of castes and creeds, we are going to have many political parties
above their creed or will they place creed above country? I do not know. But this much is
certain that if the parties place creed above country, our independence will be put in jeopardy
a second time and probably be lost forever" (Dr. B.R. Ambedkar quoted by Maheshwari, 2006).
In the light of the authority of Parliament to amend the Indian Constitution, the above opinions
seem to be quite logical and genuine.
"The Indian Constitution was made on principles borrowed liberally from all these constitutions;
no wonder it is Khitcheri (a mixed broth), faceless and without indigenous features. While it
enshrines the great principles of freedom of all varieties, equality and so forth in Articles 14,
19 and 31, it fails to set up a legal dispensation which can make justice affordable for the rich
and poor alike. And, duty is not enforceable. Today, one is guilty or innocent in relation to his
mental and monetary resources to hire expensive lawyers, ability to pursue the case, bribe the
police, corrupt the system and muscle in and out of the court fearlessly. There is no absolute
guilt nor absolute innocence. Money can change the situations." (Pathak, 2006).
"The Constitution was made by the Constituent Assembly which was not elected by the people
of the country. The Constitution was not adopted by the people through a referendum either. A
document created by assembly of persons who were 'appointed' cannot claim to have the
sanction of the people of the country. Be that as it may, the Constitution provides for
amendment by the elected representatives. There are two provisions which nullify this
approach. (i) Ruling of the Courts that even the Parliament cannot change the basic structure
of the Constitution; and (ii) The provision of whip in the Representation of the People Act. The
Supreme Court has been established by past governments. If we start from the undemocratic
nature of the Constituent Assembly then the character of the Judiciary established by the
Constitution also becomes undemocratic. An undemocratic Constituent Assembly created a
judicial system which may not be acceptable to the people. Those elected through such an
unacceptable electoral system appointed judges to the Supreme Court. This undemocratically
constituted Supreme Court has held that the Legislature does not have the authority to alter
the basic structure' of the Constitution." (Jhunjhunwala, 2006).
"The present anti-people constitution based on exploitative colonial institutions centralised,
non-transparent and bureaucratised, was authenticated in the name of the people in criminal
breach of their trust. As such, in law, it is a fraudulent document. It is, therefore, a legal
necessity to replace it by one based on the wishes of the sovereign people. If such a process of
reform is not instituted soon, India is likely to drift into anarchy and balkanisation. It may then
be to late to make amends" (Sharma, 2006). "Continuing further with current pattern of
functioning can only aggregate our problems." (Muthamma 2002, page 47).
"At the time of independence, the Indian ruling elite which took over the reins of power was
substantially influenced by notions of Western modernity and did not see a different
(independent) path for itself. It voluntarily accepted this path and placed the country on this
road to development. Bombay Plan drawn up in 1946 by an influential group of industrialists
was one such blueprint for independent India. Gandhi who suggested an indigenous path of
development based on decentralised economic structures and non-market based solutions to
India's problems, was quickly marginalized by the elite. Not just the Communists but also the
nationalists saw Gandhi's call to base our approach on our past and not on the notions emerging
from the West as undesirable archaic if not reactionary" (Dutt, 1947).
"The leaders of independent India in 1947 chose to retain the foundations of the British Indian
state. They chose not to make a break with the colonial past, but to prolong its life. The
perpetuation of European institutions and concepts of rule of law, order and good government,
complemented by the so-called free market reforms in the present period, has led to an acute
and deepening crisis of values in Indian society "(Raghavan, 2007). "If we see our present
system of governance, we find that the administrative structure at the field remains more or
less the same as devised by the Britishers during the colonial rule. The States are divided into
administrative units of district, sub-division and Taluka or a Block and the kingpins of the field
administration are the District Magistrate and the Superintendent of Police. We must note that
this system, while it may have been useful during the colonial period for maintenance of law
and order and revenue collection is certainly not in tune with the present day development
requirements which the administration is supposed to discharge" (Marwah, 2006).
"The independence from British rule in 1947 however led to the transfer of power from British
colonialism to the Indian capitalists and landlords and not to the masses of Indian people as our
martyrs had dreamt. The last sixty years of independence has led to the consolidation of the
rule of the Indian big capitalists, who have ambitions for India to become a super power and
declared 2020 as a deadline for the same. They are devising new schemes to enrich
themselves, make themselves militarily more powerful with atom bombs and missiles, and
enter the global game of finance capital and super powers, in alliance and rivalry with AngloAmerican and various imperialist forces" (Raghvan, 2007). "As India's economy clocks impressive
growth, the instruments of governance continue to decay. The police and bureaucracy are
pretty much the same as the British left them. These institutions have little accountability and
are amenable to do the bidding of their political masters. Mayawati or Mulayam are no
exceptions. In most States, Chief Ministers try to ensure a subservient administration. Sooner
rather than later, the lack of robust institutions will effect India's growth. Instead of waiting
for that to happen, steps must be taken to improve governance" (Editor, 2007c).
"There are more failures than successes making the inference inescapable that the fifty years
of Working of the Constitution is substantially a saga of missed opportunities" (Kashayap, 2006).
II. LEGISLATORS: OBVIOUS OUTCOME OF THE COMBINATION:
"It is well-known that a number of elected candidates have criminal record, and money and
muscle power continue to have considerable influence on the electoral verdict. In reality, the
unaccounted black money and other undesirable factors seem to be decisive. A much more
suitable candidate without the help of these factors has seldom any prospect of success. This is
a dismal scene and needs to be corrected. Religion, parochial, caste and other similar factors
weigh with political parties in the choice of candidates and the outcome" (Verma, 2006). "The
degeneration is so much that some years back we had a Union Minister of State for Home
Affairs against whom almost eighty FIRs involving grave crimes had been lodged in various
police stations" (Sharda, 2002, page 237).
"Politicians as a rule are self-serving. They look after personal interests first and then the
interest of their party. The country comes last. Politicians have been exploiting the democratic
system for self and party interests. This explains the vacuum in national leadership at the top"
(Sharma, 2007). "For the past few months we have had reports of Maoists using vehicles of
politicians and contractors who are sympathisers and offer moral and financial support to
them", the official said. Additional DGP special branch, Gouri Shankar Rath admitted that SUVs
are under public scanner" (Ojha, 2007). "There was a time when politicians were thought of as
honest but are now viewed as the most dishonest." (Jha, 2007)
"The average politician is now seen as selfish who shamelessly appropriates power, perks,
patronage and indulges in rampant corruption to amass wealth in five years sufficient to last
for five generations to come. The older man in the street recalls that he had more access to
rectification of grievances under the foreign rule and less distance from justice under
feudalism in the pre-independence dispensation. He finds there is deterioration of probity;
indeed far greater arrogance of office in the bureaucracy at all levels. Democracy is seen as a
channel to strengthen the advantages of the "connected" and politics and officialdom conspire
to subordinate national interest to myopic populism" (Mehta, 2006). "The popular phrase,
politics is the last resort for scoundrels has literally come true with large number of big-wigs
facing prosecution for charges levelled against them" (Patel and Patel, 2002, page 98).
"No minister; Don't speech, just listen" (Jug Suriaya 2007a). Now look at what people felt is
lacking in our leaders. "The biggest complaint is they aren't honest. Another common
perception was that most leaders are in politics to serve their own ends and think little about
the country or the people. About 56% felt they are there only to pander to their own interests
and ego. It is no surprise that just 6% rated the current leadership as very good and less than a
fourth as good" (Times Insight Group, 2007). "From the street constable who can be bought for
Rs. 50/- to let an errant trucker or motorist go free, to a chief minister who, indicted in a
scam, can openly defy the legal system by saying that he is answerable only to the court of the
people, the Indian State - as exemplified by its representatives at various levels - is commonly
seen to be up for sale or otherwise open to subversion from within" (Jug Suraiya 2007b).
"Mukhiyas themselves openly claim that they contest only for power and pelf, said Anil Kumar,
the outgoing mukhiya from Ghogha Panchayat in Bhagalpur district. The post is for earning
money, Sunita Devi a Zila Parishad candidate in East Champaran district is candid enough to
spell out her plan for action if she wins. 'Panch sal me to log dhanik ho jata, to ham kaha na
hokhaba. (People become rich in five years, so why should not I), she said..... A mukhiya is
successful if he or she earns at least Rs. 20.00 lakh by the end of their terms, said a candidate"
(Times News Network, 2006).
"We have to think of the future of parliamentary institutions and of the ideals of freedom and
democracy, stability and accountability. In a Parliamentary polity, there can be nothing sadder
or more dangerous than the representative credentials of the representatives becoming suspect
and an increasing alienation taking place between the people and their representatives. Today,
we are in a situation where sanctity of means has lost all value, meaning and relevance. If
dacoits, smugglers, gangsters and foreign agents can help put us or sustain us in power
prepared to compromise with them. We are prepared to buy stability of our chairs by bribing
fellow legislators. The people feel that in the face of personal ambitions, the new breed of
politicians in all parties are selfish, power hungry, greedy, dishonest, hypocrites and the power
merchants for whom the nation comes last and the welfare of the people is at the bottom of
priorities. Their only concern is to amass wealth and somehow get to stay in power. They are
so busy in the struggle for survival that they have no time or inclination left for serving the
people" (Yerankar, 2003).
"India's main worry is that those who are operating the Constitution – both elected and selected
– lack adequate preparation as well as proper attitudes and behavioural orientations. The
human material operating the Constitution is not upto the mark to fulfill the dreams of the
Constitution - makers, which is perhaps India's saddest shame. No Constitution is a shade better
than the men and women, operating it. The most serious problem confronting the Indian
politics is its criminalisation confirmed by the Vohara Committee Report. The growing nexus
between bureaucracy, politician, businessman and criminal poses the greatest threat to both
democracy and good governance in the society" (Maheshwari, 2006).
"Criminals have flocked in hundreds into Central and State Legislatures, and into Cabinets. The
courts are unable to convict any resourceful person beyond appeals. Harshad Mehta and
Narashimha Rao died of natural causes before their cases ended. The only quick justice in India
comes from Maoist groups, who in many districts hold their own courts, pronounce verdicts and
impose penalties on the spot. That is not the privatisation I favour. But it seems to be the only
one we will get." (Swaminathan and Aiyar, 2006b).
"I salute your hard hitting editorial." Hunger Pangs (Sep. 18). To satiate the greed of a few,
millions are being deprived of their two square meals. The question is, will the editorial
succeed in opening the eyes of our thick-skinned and myopic policy-makers? Will those who cry
over non-issues listen just this once? Why are there no riots by our patriotic representatives
over this crucial issue across the country? What are the priorities of political parties, no matter
what their leaning? Who will stop this treason? If we can't find honest answers to these crucial
questions, we are nothing more than a banana republic, fooling ourselves with tall claims of
greatness" (Jain, Mahen, 2007).
III. WORKING OF THE POLITICAL PARTIES:
"Although political parties were not mentioned in the Constitution until the fifty second
constitutional amendment enacted in 1985; the fact remains that representative democratic
polity under the Constitution presumed a well organised system of political parties" (Kashyap,
2002, page 4). "Unfortunately in India, while we established a written Constitution, we did not
provide in it for the formation and recognition of political parties either at the national or
State level. This was left to evolution. The result has been that the Congress continued to be
the only national party and no other political party emerged as an alternative at the national
level. The dramatic growth of the Bhartiya Janta Party in the last 10 years has raised a hope
that national alternative may come into being in next few years. Yet, today it does not stand
on its own strength and has per force to depend on a coalition" (Sathe, 2006). "Our Constitution
probably did not envisage the possibility of governance by coalitions. Our current rules and
norms are clearly incapable of promoting stable governance in fragmented legislatures.
However, coalition governments function reasonably efficiently in several countries. It is
important to scrutinise the best features of comparative political systems, and modify them to
suit our own needs" (Dutta, 2007).
In case of multi-party based Lok Sabha and State Assemblies, formulation and survival of the
particular institution of governance compel to adopt 'Rule of Majority Vote', i.e., "agreement
among more than fifty per cent members of the concerned institution of governance", instead
of 'Rule of Maximum Vote', i.e., "agreement among the highest number of the members of the
institution of governance". On the contrary, the provision of formation and registration of a
new political party recognises and encourages 'disagreement and intolerance' among the
members of the political party. Conflict between the requirement of formation and survival of
the institution of governance, i.e., 'agreement among more than fifty percent members of the
institution of governance' on one hand and the split of the political party, i.e. 'disagreement
and intolerance among one third of the members of the political party' creates instability firstly
to the political party and finally to the institution of governance which, in turn, creates the
space and scope for the sale and purchase of the members of Lok Sabha and State Assemblies
like other commodities. The past history of sixty years witnesses this argument and
observation.
"We have long witnessed criminals being wooed by political parties and given cabinet posts
because their muscle and money power fetches crucial votes. Elections are won and lost on
swings of just 1% of the vote, so parties cynically woo every possible vote bank, including those
headed by accused robbers and murderers" (Swaminathan and Aiyar, 2006a) "Under the present
system, aspiring candidates do not need the support of the electorate, they need the support
of a party, as the party with its money and organisation, can get them elected.... The
formation of the governments on the basis of party majorities distorts the representative
process at all levels before and after election. The need to win party majorities is responsible
for the no-holdes-barred fights, including black money, criminal gangs, continuous aggressive
confrontations between parties including physical fights in and outside the legislatures and
even murders" (Muthamma, 2002, page 43 and 44). "Political system had become corrupt and
party leaders thrive on the support of rowdy elements in society. The challenge is to design an
electoral system under which it is not possible for such elements to come into power"
(Parthasarathy, 2003).
"The representatives" within such a system of representative democracy act on behalf of the
'sovereign', organise themselves into political parties, carry out the most vicious competition
for positions of power and go to the "fellow countrymen" every few years to provide themselves
with the credibility, the mandate that they have the right to continue. These 'representatives'
go to the people to demand that they must divide along their political party lines and decide
which one of them must govern during the period before the next elections" (Bains, 2007). "The
interests of the politicians and criminals are complementary to each other. Whereas, on the
one hand the criminals need political protection from official action, the politicians need
criminals at the time of electioneering for demonstration of manpower, convassing, booth
capturing, impersonation rigging etc." (Sahai, 2002, page 31). "What we witnessed were
opportunistic alliances; parties have migrated from one camp to the opposite one. Such kind of
alliances are against democratic norms; they distort the results" (Annoussamy, 2005).
"Politics of caste and politics of fear go together. It is bad enough to demand votes in the name
of caste; it is worst to deny votes in the names of caste; to terrorize hapless minority groups
and prevent them from exercising their franchise fearlessly. Hate propaganda too is yet
another pollutant in vote-bank politics. All these defects are well known; they do cause
concern among thoughtful people. Unfortunately, few are willing to accept that radical
remedies are needed" (Indiresan, 2006).
"Observing that 'criminal, even convicted criminals are taking part in elections and getting
elected to legislatures', Mr. Narayanan quoted the prophetic writings of Mahatma Gandhi in
1920's, 'What if unworthy people get elected because we do not come forward? If such people
enter the legislatures, the Government will not be able to run the Government of an awakened
people and it will be laughed at." Mr. Narayanan continued, "Today it is more than a laughing
matter….. If the organised political parties, who are not obliged to field anyone as a candidate,
refrain from giving tickets to individuals with a criminal background, it would be possible to
deal effectively with the problem of criminals in politics. Is this too much expected from the
political parties?"(Chhokar, 2006).
"I have myself fought ten elections and fortunately won all of them. I found that there were
defects in the election. But, it was difficult to blame either the government, or the officers or
the political parties or even the candidates opposing me. We should identify the defects in the
system" (Patil, 2002, page 11). "The nature of our political system and the resultant
politicization of caste and communal identities had proved to be very divisive of society and
disruptive of the national ethos. To cobble up a workable majority to form government,
compromises had to be made and ideology or notions of quality of governance took a back seat.
It became difficult to take strong measures to curb corruption and provide clean and quality
governance. In the end, the citizen was the victim of all the mis-governance" (Kashyap, 2006).
"Parties no longer consider it important to explain to the people their stand on various
important issues confronting the people and the nation and what they had done and in future
proposed to do in relation to those issues in order to solve the problems of the people. As a
result, some disturbing trends had appeared degenerating the quality of political life and the
character of the political parties. The nation was a witness to the indecent scene of the parties
shamelessly wooing the actors and actresses in the cinema and in the TV serials to join the
parties and campaign for them, no matter by reciting their dialogues on the screen. Politics is
no longer a serious business of the nation. It is an entertainment show. Parties select
candidates not on the basis of their character, qualifications and their performance but by
their so called, "winnability" (Dubhashi, 2006).
"Politics has lost its capacity for uniting the country. It no longer offers a story of India that can
bind together. It has also lost touch with young, modern India. It offers no role models for the
millions of young. A new, young India is thinking confidently and wants to get on with jobs,
gadgets, travel, sex and, of course, winning. This is why sports unite people while politics
divides them. First, we here the amazing success of a film like Chak De! India, which played on
Indianness of the women Hockey players coming from all over India plus their Muslim coach.
Then there has been the Twenty 20 success. Everyone could understand the confident, hard
working, hard celebrating Indian side. This is young India and indeed non-metropolitan India.
No one in politics is taking with it" (Desai, 2007a).
"If obscurantism is reckoned to be a bulwark for power, the Congress will not shy away from
embracing it – that is the message, driven home with a pile-driver. And where does the
Congress's ideologically threadbare political calculus come from? From a profound unwillingness
to engage with people, with the political process and ideas. Since the party has given up on
meaningful mobilization based on grass-roots engagement, given up on building a broad-based
democratic organisational structure, it is forced to try and second-guess, what the people
think. And since it has lost faith in the people, it has elected a new people in its own distorted
image" (Sen, Suhit , 2007).
"As a student of human behaviour, I believe that a substantial portion of the behavior of the
political class can be explained as a logical response to the broader social system within which
they have to operate. And the electoral system is a major and immediate part of that broader
social system. Consequently, one way to change the behavior of the political class would be to
change the system in which they have to operate and to which they have to respond. This is
where electoral reforms become important" (Chhokar, 2006).
At the end, it would be beneficial to explain the reform agenda of National Commission to
Review the Working of the Constitution related to Political Parties.
"Political Parties: Political parties should be institutionalized through a comprehensive
legislation to govern and regulate their number and activities, lay down criteria for their
registration and recognition as national or State level parties and their deregistration and/or
derecognition in case of violation of norms laid down. The law should make it compulsory for
the parties to maintain accounts of the receipt of funds and expenditure in a systematic and
regular way. The accounts should also be compulsorily audited and available to public for study
and inspection. The proposed law should provide for certain other matters like funding and
democratic and clean internal functioning of parties. It may provide for making it compulsory
for the political parties to require their candidates to declare their assets and liabilities at the
time of filing their nomination before the returning officers for election to any office at any
level. It should be laid down in law that no political party should sponsor or provide ticket to a
candidate for contesting elections, if he was convicted by any court for any criminal offence or
if the courts had framed criminal charges against him. The law should specifically provide that
if any party violated this provision, the candidate involved should be liable to be disqualified
and the party deregistered and derecognized forthwith. If implemented, this would be
obviously an effective check on criminals' increasing clout and control in political parties.
Number of Parties: Unless the number of political parties and/or alliances at the national and
State levels is regulated by law, representational legitimacy of our legislators with a first-passthe-post system cannot be assured. Also, no scheme of State funding can succeed. Only
recognized national parties and pre-poll alliances (i.e. those that secure at least 10% of the
votes cast) should be allotted common symbols to contest elections to Lok Sabha. State Parties
may be allowed common symbols to contest elections for State Legislatures and the Council of
States (Rajya Sabha). This would, by prompting pre-poll alliances, automatically consolidate
the vote and help in evolving some sort of federal parties or alliances providing more stable
governments. There could be no difficulty in passing such a law in both Houses of Parliament
because it was in the best interests of major parties.
Funding of Parties: Reform proposals in regard to political funding should revolve round (1)
reducing costs, (2) better utilization of funds, (3) curtailing influence peddling and political
corruption, (4) strengthening public disclosure and transparency mechanisms with respect to
the sources and the use of funds, (5) permitting higher corporate donations with higher limits
and tax exemptions, and (6) submission of false or incorrect returns bringing immediate
derecognizing of the party.
Seats for Women: Reservation by law should be made for at least 30 per cent of organizational
positions at various levels in every political party and the same percentage of party tickets for
parliamentary and State legislature seats should be given to women with failure to do so
inviting penalty of the party losing recognition.
Training to Party Cadres: It is important that political parties in India realize the importance
of imparting to their members necessary professional training in the modern techniques, tools
and methods of political management, legislative functioning, leadership roles etc. NCRWC has
suggested some institutional mechanism for planning, thinking and research on crucial issues
facing the nation and educational cells for socializing the party cadres and preparing them for
responsibilities of governance" (Kashyap, 2006).
IV.WORKING OF THE INSTITUTIONAL STRUCTURE OF GOVERNANCE:
Multi-party based five-tier centralized top-to-bottom institutional structure of governance has
forced to accept very large constituencies of Lok Sabha and State Assemblies. Presently, the
average size of Lok Sabha constituency is around ten lakh voters and the average size of the
Vidhan Sabha constituency is around one and half lakh voters. In order to win the contest,
every contesting candidate has to influence maximum number of the voters of the
constituency/electoral college. For this purpose, the common voters own the social action
only. It is a well-known fact that the social action is always area specific. Therefore, the
spread effect of the social action is bound to be limited. "Surely no individual however
charismatic can meaningfully interact with his constituency or even with his voters"
(Shahbuddin, 2002, page 49). Consequently, for influencing ten lakh and one and half lakh
voters spread over a very large geographical area, social action becomes inadequate and
ineffective. Inadequacy and ineffectiveness of the social action (which the common voters
own) and effectiveness of money and muscle power (which the common voters do not own) in
influencing ten lakh and one and half lakh voters virtually compel the common voters to refrain
from exercising their democratic right to stand as contesting candidates at the elections and
consequently provide full opportunity to the political parties for nominating their candidates at
the elections.
"In countries where there is democratic voting, as is also the case in our country, the
electorate has proven unable to resist the promises of short-term benefits from politicians who
wish to be elected. So, one finds in so many countries of the world, the elected leaders
resorting to short-term policies for the sake of getting re-elected the next-time. Demagogues
are able to influence the unsophisticated masses often with bribery or offers of special
benefits, and the whole system of governance is overturned. Beyond that, information is
manipulated, the electorate is uninformed, it does not know what the real issues are or what
the nature of the people who are standing for election is, and so the system does not work.
What this means is that one of the major problems in the world is the breakdown of the system
of governance, be it a democratic form or any other form. If the democratic form is the most
popular one in the world today, it is very difficult to find countries where it is not under
serious strain......... People are becoming alienated. So one of the problems of governance is
that the governments are proving unresponsive to the real needs of people, and people are
responding by giving up on it, and saying: What's the use of voting. This bunch of jokers go out,
another bunch comes in, and they are no better, and it's the same sort of thing" (Merchant,
2006). "It is the result of increasing disconnect between institutions of the state and citizens.
The State, represented by courts, legislatures and bureaucracy, routinely fails to recognise the
needs of citizens, it sets out to govern. What is worse is that law makers who are expected to
set an example by respecting the sanctity of the laws are most often guilty of breaking them.
The anti-democratic character of state institutions is largely responsible for such a mess"
(Editor, 2006).
"We boast that we are the world's biggest democracy yet, time after time, our elected
representatives flagrantly rip us off: they renege on their election promises; they squander
public money (our money); they turn Parliament into a three-ring circus which costs Rs. one
crore a day to run. 'Lack of governance' has become a formulaic mantra which through constant
repetition has ceased to have any meaning. 'Lack of governance' is not just a truth" its a truth
that has petrified into a cliche. And in this fossilised truth is preserved the total and utter
contempt our political leaders and our so-called administrators hold the people in, hold us in"
(Jug Suraiya, 2007c). "Even if our political class responds to the Supreme Court's orders, the
reforms will not be meant well. The police force in the hands of any Chief Minister is an
instrument to help him fight his rivals in his own set-up, besides keeping a vigilant eye on the
opposition's moves. The lower ranks of State police, CRPF or BSF are treated like slaves. They
have no fixed working hours and besides poor pay, their education is minimal. Unless there is
transparency on part of the States and the Centre, lower ranks of police force are led to
believe, while performing their law and order duties, that they are paid to suffer injuries, if
not face death. If they don't realize that they are damaging the image of the law and order
machinery we will be faced with criminals who were once police constables" (Durga, 2007).
"Subsequently, the Samajwadi Party MP, Uday Pratap Singh was appointed the government
nominee in the selection committee. Nevertheless, the High Court stayed the operations of the
changes in the bylaws, annulled the nomination of Singh and ridiculed the government for
nominating a non-technical person. The government, however, went on to nominate the
recently sacked CSMU V-C SS Katiyar as lifetime chairman of the selection committee.
Interestingly, a V-C's term spans for three years but Katiyar was nominated for lifetime.
Ironically, Katiyar had been nominated against the recommendations of the then technical
education secretary PK Jha, who had suggested the names of IIT Kanpur Director SG Dhande,
the present UPTU V-C Prem Vart and Purvanchal University V-C K.P. Singh to head the selection
committee. Interestingly, Jha had to pay the price as he was immediately shunted as secretary
fisheries. Not only this, even after Prem Vart, who was then senior faculty at the IIT Delhi, took
over as the UPTU V-C last year, he was not allowed to be part of the selection process. The
continuance of Katiyar was against the by-laws of the technical institutes as per which the V-C
of the affiliating varsity or an eminent academician could be appointed the chairman of the
selection committee" (Singh, 2007).
"The Congress MLAs then entered the podium and stood before the Speaker's dias and started
arguing with him. Joshi demanded that minister Rathor should be sacked by the government
after the court's verdict. But the plea was disallowed by the Deputy Speaker. Irked by this,
some Congress members entered into an argument with the Deputy Speaker. And Ram Lal Jat,
a Congress member snatched papers from the hands of the Deputy Speaker and threw it. One
Congress member threw the chair of the Secretary of the House. Provoked by this act, Devi
Singh Bhati, who recently joined BJP, rushed to the podium and tried to grab Joshi by the
collar. Members of the ruling party then rushed to the podium and for a few minutes it looked
like a free for all with members pushing each other and jostling. Bhati was seen rushing
towards Gudha to beat him as the latter was seen scuffing with ruling party members"
(Bhandari, 2007). "It is the failure on the part of a certain section of people coming into
Parliament", he said adding that media too had a role in it as they give prominence to
disturbances and not debates. Some feel disturbances catch the eyes of the people, he said. I
feel parties will realize that they are missing opportunities to raise vital issues and rectify their
mistakes, he added" (Chatterjee, 2007).
"The present is not very exhilarating, particularly when we think of the decline of values in all
spheres and all professions, rampant conflicts and corruption, terrorist activities, the use of
money and muscle power in elections 'the politicisation of criminals' and 'Criminalisation of
politics', the going-on in some legislatures and the many fissiparous and divisive tendencies like
casteism and communalism raising their ugly heads here and there. The noble aims and
objectives enshrined in the preamble have not been achieved. After over five decades of
democracy it is time to ask ourselves whether we could have been better off if we had refined
some of the basic ingredients of democracy in their application in any way. And there are very
many which include electoral reforms, decriminalization of politics, eradication of the cancer
of corruption, good governance, police reforms and so on" (Gopa and Basu, 2003).
"The Supreme Court realises that the issue of VIP squatters is more than trespassing on public
property. The VIP syndrome breeds a culture that seriously undermines the rule of law, a basic
feature of constitutional democracy. It privileges the powerful over citizens, their demeaning
the idea of citizenship in a republic. The government should act immediately on the apex
Court's observations. That should be the first step to transform the VIP into a normal citizen.
And, eventually, to allow the species to disappear altogether" (Editor, 2007d). "The High Court
then pulled up the police for its inaction over the issue of kidnapping." If people's
representatives are kidnapped before elections, then where is the need for holding election?
Ban it. If the police are not able to act upon complaints, then people's faith in the system will
be eroded. In such a situation, days are not far away when the State may witness scenes that
are occurring in Bihar where people are taking law into their own hands," a division bench
headed by Justice K.L. Manjunath, observed (Times News Network, 2007c).
"The apex court observed in the morning that it would ask the Centre to impose President's rule
in the State if there was no compliance. This is not merely violation of our order: but a
complete breakdown of the constitutional machinery in the State, said Acting Chief Justice BN
Agarwal who headed the Bench also comprising Justice P. Sathasivam." If this is the situation
we will have to direct the central government to impose President's rule in the state... If you
make out a case for 'contempt to court', we will not hesitate in summoning even the Chief
Minister and the Chief Secretary", the bench told the AIADMK" (Raghavan, 2007).
"The 73rd and 74th Amendments also enable State laws to provide for the membership of MLAs
and MPs in the local bodies. Dual membership in the two Legislatures is repugnant to the
Constitution under Article 101. It is a moot point whether membership of MPs and MLAs in local
bodies, which are also legislative, is consistent with the Constitution. If it is important for the
voice of an MP or an MLA to be heard in a municipal council or a district panchayat, is it not
equally important that the voice of a panchayat member or a municipal councillor is also heard
in the State Legislature and the Parliament?" (Sivaramakrishnan, 2006). "There is a growing
feeling that in the larger municipal bodies, the citizens do not have easy access to the elected
representatives since the ward-sizes become very large. The Committee, therefore, is of the
view that within the territorial area of Municipality having a population of three lakhs or more,
Wards Committees should be constituted. The details relating to the composition and the
territorial area of the Wards Committee and the manner of filling seats in such committees can
be left to the State Legislatures" (The Parliament Committee, quoted by Sivaramakrishnan,
2006).
"The Gandhian approach to decentralization of power and of putting the village at the centre
of the polity cannot be frowned upon or dismissed as anti-democratic in as much even under
the present dispensation the President, the Vice-President, the Rajya Sabha, the Prime Minister
are all indirectly elected. But, in the political culture and circumstances of today, Gandhi and
his views would certainly seem utopian and impracticable. Other reform options, therefore,
need to be considered" (Kashyap, 2002, page 2). "Even before independence, Mahatma Gandhi,
the Father of the Nation had already launched his constructive programme of rural
development and poverty removal through the voluntary efforts of the people. He
experimented with a self-sufficient and self-supporting village economy. The society envisaged
by him was to be self-initiated and non-violent, where the individual could have maximum
freedom for himself, whilst still being part of his immediate community. The smaller
community would be linked to a larger community until, ultimately, all become part of the
larger world community" (Gangrade, 1985). "Once the classes are abolished, there is no need of
the state and it gradually withers away, which finally leads to a classless and stateless
communist society. Once the communist society comes into existence, there will be no scope
for classes and class antagonisms and the "social evolution will cease to be political revolutions"
(Karl Marx, quoted by Satyanarayana, 2004).
"India should have, after attaining independence, considered the question of evolving a new
form of democracy suiting to the conditions and goals and ideals that we cherish in India"
(Joshi, 2002, page 122). "We also need to evolve a large range of institutional forms for
realising democratic aspirations, with electoral democracy being just one of them" (Mukhia,
2006). "Hung houses come because the electoral system is divisive and generates communal
and caste-based vote-bank politics. Also, the real cause of instability is concentration of power
in the present top-down model of polity. The bottom-up Gandhian model envisaged
decentralisation of power with village at the centre and power flowing upward from the
grassroots to concentric circles of multi-tier governance and direct elections only at the
Panchayat and Nagarpalika levels. The Gandhian model came very close to the German
subsidiarity principle and advocated that what could not be done at the lower tier alone should
be assigned to be next higher tier. National Commission to Review the Working of the
Constitution carefully considered the strong presentations and representations made in support
of this Gandhian model but the model was not found feasible in the present situation"
(Kashyap, 2006). "In India, especially during Jaiprakash Narayan's movement in 1974, the
concept of partyless democracy was propounded. But, in reality the talk of democracy without
parties sounds impractical making it almost a utopian concept" (Saharabudhe, 2002, page 162).
V. WORKING OF THE PROCEDURE FOR ELECTION:
As per Constitutional Democratic Republic, Prime Minister of the country and Chief Ministers of
the States are elected as per the 'Rule of Majority Vote'. The Members of Lok Sabha/State
Assemblies are divided into two Alliances - one is to be in power and the other is to be in
opposition. The members of Lok Sabha and State Assemblies are elected as per ' the first-pastthe post' system. In this system (referred to in Section 32 of the Representation of People Act
1951) any candidate who polls the highest number of votes wins without reference to the
percentage of votes polled. A winner may get only 20% of the votes, or less; he wins, if this is
more than what others get" (Pappu, 2006).
The procedure for election laid down in the Representation of the People Acts 1950 and 1951 is
based on the misconception of direct-indirect election. In Representative Democracy, the
voters are bound to be different in different constituencies/electoral colleges. Therefore, on
the basis of the identity of the voters it is not proper to classify the concept of election or
procedure for election or for that matter as direct election and indirect election. Irrespective
of so called direct or indirect election, the concerned voters follow one and the same
procedure for electing their representatives. In fact, the words 'direct and indirect' are related
to the participation of the voters in the election as well as in the constitution and operation of
the institutional structure of governance. "What is necessary is not merely participation in the
election process but participatory governance" (Sangma, 2002, page 17). At the lowest level,
the concerned voters participate directly in electing their nominees/representatives and in
constituting and operating the institution of governance. At the higher levels, they participate
indirectly through their nominees/representatives for electing the higher order of nominees/
representatives and constituting-operating the higher level institutions of governance. In brief,
the terms "direct participation and indirect participation are directly linked with the
combination of level of governance-election-constitution and operation of the institution of
governance". Direct participation in the election and indirect participation in the constitution
and operation of the institution of governance is the deceptive arrangement for the
implementation of the ideal form of Representative Democracy.
"At present, the legal dictum is that it is better to let 99 guilty persons go free rather than
convict one innocent individual. That is fair enough when a person is being deprived of his
fundamental right or liberty, or even the right to vote. Contesting elections is a different
matter altogether. Standing for elections should not be a right but a privilege that has to be
earned. No great harm is done to a person if permission is not granted to contest elections. It is
better to stop 99 persons who are not guilty from contesting rather than allow one dangerous
person to do so" (Indiresan, 2006). On the same issue, at other place Indiresan (2002, page 40)
says, "At the same time, excluding any one goes against the very foundation of free society".
Requirement of a valid nomination paper along with unlimited amount of money and muscle
power for contesting election have already victimised over 99.99 percent innocent voters of
the total voters of the country by forcing them not to contest elections. How to stop less than
0.01 percent dangerous voters of the total voters of the country from contesting elections, is
the one and the only one malady which demands feasible remedy.
"When democracy becomes corrupt, the best gravitates to the bottoms, the worst floats to the
top and the vile is replaced by more vile. We observed that we do not now practice democracy
but gravitate towards 'democracy' with perceptible participation of criminals their pervasive
influence" (Henry George, quoted by Singh, Ranbir, 2006). "Ways and means have to be found
for reasserting the will of 'We, the People' over the organs of the State - the Legislature, the
Executive and the Judiciary- and restoring power to the citizens where it belongs. This would
call for respect for citizenship values and emergence and strengthening of a civil society with
an aware, awake, responsible and participant citizenry" (Kashyap, 2006). "All the countries in
the world need renewal. All countries in South Asia have the same needs. By renewing
themselves, that is, by starting afresh on the basis of the experience of the entire world and
most particularly their own, they will be making their own contribution to the renewal of the
world" (Bains, 2007). "The need of the hour is to elaborate and develop modern Indian thought
- philosophy, political and economic theory - so as to address the problem that stares us in the
face. This is the problem of ending the arbitrariness of power and the colonial style plunder in
new and varied forms. It is the problem of redefining the foundations and reconstituting the
structure of the Indian polity and economy, towards a direct democracy and a people centric
economy that provide prosperity and protection to all" (Raghavan, 2007).
"In the assemblies and Parliament that provide elected representatives, the most powerful
forums for raising issues and debates that focus on conduct and performance of governments,
we find sycophancy attaining heights of eloquence witnessed never before, lies and deceit that
have no parallel, and hooliganism and rowdism that can shame even the third rate democracies
in the world. The plight of the impoverished and cheated people, their exploitation,
intimidation and abuse and their vulnerability to extortion, fears and threat is all but forgotten
in the clamour for higher salaries, allowances, pensions, privileges, and perks. Should 'We, the
people of India' watch in silence this vulgarity, this affront to our sensibilities, this brutal
assault on the sacred tenets enshrined in our Constitution" (Singh, Ranbir, 2006). "Perhaps, the
most important lesson is that significant changes in the electoral system will not happen
without sustained and concerted action by a concerned and active citizenry because just as
war is too important to be left to the generals, so is politics too important to be left only to
the politicians. Concerned citizens need to take an active part in politics without being
politicians because "the price good man will pay for not getting involved is to be governed by
bad man". This seems essential if electoral reforms are to move from discussion to action"
(Chhokar, 2006).
Before proceeding further, it seems proper to explain the electoral reforms agenda of National
Commission to review the Working of the Constitution.
Electoral Reforms: The electoral and political party reforms considered necessary may be
grouped under two major heads, viz. (1) practice and procedure related and (2) system
related. Most of these do not call for any constitutional amendments. They are matters for
political reforms which can be brought about through ordinary legislation or through rules,
regulations and executive orders provided that the political will gets crystallised. Civil society
activists and concerned citizens would do well to realise this and build public pressure on
Parliament.
Representational Legitimacy: To ensure representational legitimacy to legislators within the
existing system, it could be laid down that in order to be declared a winner, a candidate must
secure a minimum of 50 per cent plus votes so that it becomes necessary for every winning
candidate to woo more than his caste, community or narrow group vote bank and seek a wider
consensus. If, in the first round, nobody gets over 50% then there should be a run-off contest
the very next day or soon thereafter, between the top two candidates.
Election Petitions: NCRWC has very rightly suggested setting up of special courts at the level
of High Courts taking evidence through commissioners and deciding all election cases invariably
within six months.
Independent Candidates: Something has got to be done to discourage independents and bring
down their number by increasing the security deposit in their case, disqualifying them for
future elections if they get less than say, 5% of the votes polled and providing for their
proposers and seconders being Panchayat or Nagar Palika members.
Procedural Malpractices: In the area of procedural malpractices during election processes, the
following need attention:
i.
Foolproof method of preparing electoral rolls at the village and Nagar Palika or ward
level and keeping them constantly updated.
ii. Making a multi-purpose Identity Card compulsory for all adult citizens.
iii. Display of electoral rolls at post offices in each Constituency Headquarters for public
scrutiny.
iv. Authorising the Election Commission to take more stringent action in cases of booth
capturing.
v. Use of temper-proof video and other electronic surveillance at sensitive polling
stations/constituencies.
vi. Security deposits of candidates securing less than 25% votes should be forfeited.
vii. CEC and ECs to be appointed on the recommendations of a body consisting of PM,
Leaders of the Opposition in LS and RS, Speaker of Lok Sabha and Dy Chairman of Rajya
Sabha.
Role of Money Power: If the electoral process has to steer clear of tainted and motivated
sources of funds, some of the following suggestions may need to be considered:
i.
The cost of elections must be reduced. This can be done by changing the ground rules
for electoral campaigns - partly by reducing the campaign period, banning outdoor
public rallies and encouraging the use of electronic and digital technology to campaign
at State cost.
ii. To the extent possible, State and parliamentary elections should be held
simultaneously.
iii. Declarations to be made legally mandatory by every candidate and every holder of
political office of all assets and liabilities and these declarations to be subjected to
audit and public scrutiny.
iv. No one should be allowed to contest from more than one constituency.
v. Code of conduct should be made into a law and its violation should attract penal
action.
vi. Candidates must be required to clear all government dues and vacate unauthorised
government accommodation etc. before being allowed to go to polls.
vii. A suitable law should be enacted providing penalties against damaging or desecrating
public or private property by candidates, political parties or the agents, through
painting of slogans or erecting cut-outs and hoarding or putting banners and buntings.
viii. Legitimate sources for the essentially needed funds would have to be identified. For
one, company and individual donations should be encouraged with higher limits placed
on the maximum permissible amounts and liberal tax rebates allowed.
ix. In case the present ceilings are to be continued, they should be linked to the cost of
living index so that they remain realistic. But, the expenditure incurred on a
candidate's election by his friends, by the political party or by others should also be
included while examining adherence to the ceiling. Full disclosure of the sources of
election funds and audit of receipt and expenditure should be made compulsory.
Criminalisation: In the area of criminalisation of electoral processes and politicisation of
crime, following suggestions deserve consideration:
i.
Disqualification of those charged with serious offences and derecognition of parties
putting up such candidates: Once charges relating to certain crimes have been framed
by a court against a person, he should not be permitted to contest elections unless
cleared.
ii. Speedy trial by special courts of cases involving candidates: A potential candidate
against whom charges have been framed by the police may take the matter to a special
electoral court. This court would be obliged to enquire and take a decision in a strictly
time bound manner. Basically, this court may decide whether there is indeed a prima
facie case justifying the framing of charges. If yes, the person should not be allowed to
contest.
iii. Incongruities in the existing provisions of sub-sections (1), (2) and (3) of section 8 of
the Representation of the People Act, 1951: At present, a rapist convicted and
sentenced to ten years imprisonment, may be disqualified only for six years under subsection (1) and thus remain free to contest elections, even while in prison serving the
last four years of his sentence, should be eliminated. The law should provide that
whoever is convicted of any offence by a Court of law and sentenced to imprisonment
for six months or more should be debarred from contesting elections, for a period
totaling the sentence imposed plus an additional six years.
iv. Disqualification on conviction to apply to sitting legislators: Under section 8(4), sitting
members are not disqualified even when convicted until their appeal is decided. This
should be deleted. If an elected representative gets convicted on charges related to
specific crimes, he should be required to withdraw from the legislature for six months
and if within that period he fails to get an acquittal, he should be disqualified.
v. Heinous Crimes: There should be permanent disqualification for life of those convicted
of heinous crimes.
vi. Caste and Communal Violence: Statutory provision should be made prescribing
imprisonment and disqualification for spreading caste or communal hatred during
election campaigns." (Kashyap, 2006).
VI. CONCLUSION:
"It is only when we fulfil the basic duty of politics of restoring the power of the Constitution
and its institutions back to their legitimate owners - the people - then things will began to
change. Really, no reforms shall succeed and nothing can change unless the sovereign power is
exercised by the people and they use it to discharge their citizenship responsibilities" (Kashyap,
2006). Here, the basic issue is whether the reforms suggested by NCRWC can ensure democratic
rights to every voter of the country - equal opportunity-liberty-right to contest election and to
cast his/her vote in favour of the candidate nominated by himself/herself only. Perhaps not.
For evolving or even for understanding the multi-tier institutional structure of governance and
procedure for election which can ensure democratic rights to every voter of the country, the
intellectuals were and are still supposed to decide the priority between human rights and
democratic rights.
Human Rights:
"As generally used today, the term "human rights" covers the series of often disparate rights
and freedoms asserted by many to be universally accepted and essential prerequisites for
people's enjoyment of a life based on the centrality of human dignity. Proponents of human
rights regard them as being inherent, inalienable and universal; inherent in the sense that they
are the birth right of all human beings and not have to be granted by a Sovereign for them to
be enjoyed; inalienable, in the sense that people cannot agree to give them up or have them
taken away from them; and universal in that they do not just apply to 'men', or 'citizens' or
'ethnic minorities', but to all persons, regardless of their nationality, status, sex or race. To
make a claim on the basis of human rights the following criteria must be met:
1. Realisation of the claimed right is necessary for a person or group to be able to achieve
their full humanity, in common with others.
2. The claimed right is seen either as applying to all of humanity, and is something that
the person or group claiming the right wishes to apply to all people anywhere, or as
applying to people from specific disadvantaged or marginalised groups for whom
realisation of that right is essential to their achieving their full human potential.
3. There is substantial universal consensus on the legitimacy of the claimed right; it
cannot be called a human right unless there is widespread support for it across cultural
and other divides.
4. The claimed right does not contradict other human rights. This would disallow as
human rights the 'right' to bear arms, the 'right' to hold other people in slavery, a man's
'right' to beat his wife and children, the 'right' to excessive profits resulting in poverty
for others, and so on" (Pinto, 2004).
"In the twentieth century, far more people died as a consequence of the actions of their own
governments than were killed by foreign armies. Governments, often acting in the name of
national security, can and often do pose profound threats to human security. So, in practice,
human security's focus on the security of individuals has also meant focussing on a quite
different source of security threats than those that have absorbed generations of international
relations and traditional security scholars. Today, the major threat to (narrowly defined)
human security derives from intra-State, not inter-State wars", (Mack, 2002). "In India the
individual is exposed in two fronts, he or she needs defense against the onslaught by the State
as much he or she requires protection against the oppression by the society. The civil society in
India has not yet risen up to this historic task" (Sau, 2004).
In the light of the above discussion, it can be logically and firmly concluded that 'Human Rights'
demand systems, institutions, policies, laws, acts, rules and programmes from
state/government/multi-tier centralised top-to-bottom institutional structure of governance
for the protection of different types of human rights, different types of equalities, different
types of liberties, different types of justices and different types of securities. On the other
hand, democratic rights demand equal opportunity-liberty-right to contest election and to cast
his/her vote in favour of the candidate nominated by himself/herself only to every voter of the
country. Democratic rights would ensure direct and indirect participation of every voter of the
country not only in constituting and operating multi-tier decentralised bottom-to-top
institutional structure of governance but also in formulating and implementing systems,
institutions, policies, laws, acts, rules and programmes which are necessary for protecting all
types of human rights, all types of equalities, all types of liberties, all types of justices and all
types of securities.
Democratic rights (i) satisfy all the four above mentioned criteria of being human rights; (ii)
convert the requirement of multi-party based five-tier centralised top-to-bottom institutional
structure of governance into the requirement of patyless decentralised bottom-to-top
institutional structure of governance; (iii) block the dynastic rule completely; (iv) replace 'the
first-past-the post' and 'Rule of Majority Vote' based undemocratic procedure for election by
the 'Rule of Maximum Vote' based democratic procedure for election; and (v) provide the
instrument of governance in the hands of the voters of the country and their own nominees.
Now, it is upto the legislators and the intellectuals of the country to decide the priority
between 'Human Rights' and 'Democratic Rights' and communicate their decision to the
innocent voters of the so called largest democracy of the world.
CHAPTER - 4
JUDICIAL COMMENTARY
For blocking the continuation of dynastic rule and implementing Democratic Republic in
independent India, the Constituent Assembly provided an amendable Constitution to the
sovereign citizens of independent India. Alongwith a resolution converting the Constituent
Assembly into the first Parliament, the Constituent Assembly through the Constitution passed
Article 84[c] which reads "possesses such other qualifications as may be prescribed in that
behalf by or under any law made by Parliament" and Article 327 which reads "Power of
Parliament to make provision with respect to elections to Legislatures–Subject to the provision
of this Constitution, Parliament may from time to time by law make provisions with respect to
all matters relating to, or in connection with elections to either House of Parliament or to the
House or either House of the Legislature of a State including the preparation of electoral rolls,
the delimitation of constituencies and all other matters necessary for securing the due
constitution of such House or Houses." The resolution provided the status of first Parliament
and Article 84[c] and Article 327 provided the authority to the Constituent Assembly to enact
the qualifications for the membership of Parliament.
"Article 84(c) does not make it compulsory for Parliament to prescribe any qualification other
than those prescribed by clauses (a) and (b). Parliament may or may not prescribe some such
qualifications, and having prescribed some may repeal them whenever it so desires. It cannot
be accepted that once Parliament prescribes a qualification, it cannot revoke or repeal it.
There is no such limitation on Parliament's legislative power, which is confirmed by Entry 72 of
the Union List in the Seventh Schedule. The language of clause (c) of Article 84 creates a power
and not a duty. If it is not bound to prescribe any additional qualification, it is also not bound
to provide a substitute for the one done away with" in Kuldip Nayar V. U.O.I. (2006) 7 SCC 1
(Para 303).
By exercising the status of first Parliament and the authority to enact the qualifications for the
memberships of Parliament and State Assembly, the Constituent Assembly enacted the
Representation of the People Acts 1950 and 1951. In the Constitution of India and in the
Representation of the People Acts 1950 and 1951, there are a number of Articles and Sections
respectively which make the equal opportunity-liberty-right to contest election and to cast
his/her vote in favour of the candidate nominated by himself/herself only to every voter of the
country, impractical and non-implementable. Articles 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 168, 169, 170,
171, 172, 173, 174 and 243 provide multi-party based five-tier centralised top-to-bottom
institutional structure of governance to the sovereign citizens of independent India. In order to
keep the size of Lok Sabha and State Assemblies manageable, multi-party based five-tier
centralised top-to-bottom institutional structure of governance forced to adopt very large size
of the constituencies of Lok Sabha and State Assemblies. At present the average size of Lok
Sabha constituencies is around ten lakh voters and the average size of State Assemblies
constituencies is around one and half lakh voters. It is impossible to ensure equal opportunityliberty-right to contest election and to cast his/her vote in favour of the candidate nominated
by himself/herself only to every participating voter of the constituencies of ten lakh and one
and half lakh voters.
As per Sections 4 and 5 of the Representation of the People Act 1951, to be an elector (voter)
is the main and common qualification for contesting elections for the memberships of Lok
Sabha and/or State Assemblies. As per Section 19(A) of the Representation of the People Act
1950, the minimum age for registration as an elector (voter) is 18 years. As per Article 84(b)
and Article 173(b), the minimum age for contesting elections for the membership of Lok Sabha
and State Assemblies respectively, is 25 years. Under the present contradiction regarding the
age of the contesting candidate, it is impossible to provide to every voter of the age less than
25 years equal opportunity-liberty-right to contest election and to cast his/her vote in favour
of the candidate nominated by himself/herself only.
As per Section 33 of the Representation of the People Act 1951, for attaining the status of a
contesting candidate for the membership of Lok Sabha or/and of any State Assembly,
submission of a valid nomination paper is a must. As per Section 34 of the Representation of
the People Act 1951 "a candidate shall not be deemed to be duly nominated for election from a
constituency, unless he deposits or causes to be deposited: in the case of an election from a
Parliamentary constituency, a sum of ten thousand rupees or when the candidate is a member
of a Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe a sum of five thousand rupees and in the case of an
election from an Assembly or Council Constituency, a sum of five thousand rupees or where the
candidate is a member of Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe, a sum of two thousand five
hundred rupees. As per Section 77 of the Representation of the People Act 1951, the contesting
candidate can spend huge amount of money during the contest. In these circumstances it is
impossible to provide equal opportunity-liberty-right to contest election and to cast his/her
vote in favour of the candidate nominated by himself/herself only to every voter of the
country.
Section 29A of the Representation of the People Act 1951 empowers the Election Commission of
the country to register Political Parties. The Political Parties made the Lok Sabha and State
Assemblies their shadows only. "This seemed to create a flutter in the entire political
establishment. In the all party meeting on July 8, 2002, twenty-one political parties
representing the entire political spectrum in a rare show of complete unanimity, decided that
the Supreme Court judgment and the Election Commission's order could not be allowed to be
implemented. The all party meeting unanimously decided to introduce a Bill in the Monsoon
Session of Parliament to appropriately amend the Representation of the People Act, to prevent
implementation of the Supreme Court judgement and Election Commissioner's order. With
remarkable and almost unprecedented alacrity, the Law Ministry drafted a Bill for amending
the Representation of the People Act and circulated it amongst political parties on July 15,
2002 asking for their comments with the specific intention of introducing and getting the Bill
passed in the Monsoon Session of Parliament. The Bill, however, could not be introduced as the
functioning of the Parliament was continually disrupted due to what came to be referred as the
Petrol Pump Scam, and the Parliament was adjourned. This did not deter the political
establishment. The Cabinet decided to get an Ordinance issued by the President to prevent
implementation of the SC judgment. A group of 26 people from different parts of the country
representing more than 20 civil society organisations met the President on August 16, 2002 and
urged him to return the Ordinance without signing it because some of the provisions were
violative of the Constitution. The President did return the Ordinance to the Cabinet seeking
some clarifications. The Cabinet, however, sent the Ordinance back to the President without
giving clarifications or making any modifications. In keeping with tradition, the President
signed the Ordinance on August 24, 2002" (Chhokar, 2006).
Political Parties have promoted the dynastic rule in independent India. Role of Nehru's family,
Sri Jagjeevan Ram's family, Sri Madhav Rao Sindhia's family in constituting Lok Sabha; Role of
Sri Charan Singh's family, Sri Mulayam Singh's family in the constitution of UP Legislative
Assembly; Role of Sri Devi Lal's family, Sri Bhajan Lal's family in constituting Haryana
Legislative Assembly; Role of Sri Lalu Prasad Yadav's family in constituting Bihar Legislative
Assembly; Role of Sri Prakash Singh Badal's family in constituting Punjab Legislative Assembly;
Role of Sri Bal Thackerey's family in constituting Maharashtra Legislative Assembly so on so
forth are the living examples of continuation of dynastic rule in independent India. "Coming to
know that the petitioner MLAs are brothers, the bench in a lighter vein said in Goa, politics
seems to be a family affair…… there are brothers, father-son duos" (Times News Network,
2007b). In dynastic rule, it is impossible to provide equal opportunity-liberty-right to contest
election and to cast his/her vote in favour of the candidate nominated by himself/herself only
to every voter of the country.
Survival of the Political Parties forced them to divide the Indian citizens vertically upto the
local society on the basis of religion, caste, occupation, place of stay into Political Parties. "Six
years in office, in fact, might have changed BJP as much as BJP has changed Indian politics.
The party was supposed to be allergic to caste politics because it divided India (and the
Hindus), but Vajpayee toyed with the reservation issue the same way as his predecessors did…..
granting quotas to the Jats of Rajasthan who overnight became OBC and a BJP vote bank"
(Jaffrelot, 2007). In a way, Political Parties directly work against the principle of fraternity
enshrined in the Preamble to the Constitution of India. Multi-party based five-tier centralised
top-to-bottom institutional structure of governance forced to adopt 'the first-past-the post'
undemocratic system of election for electing the members of Parliament and State Assemblies
and made it impossible to provide equal opportunity-liberty-right to contest election and to
cast his/her vote in favour of the candidate nominated by himself/herself only to every voter
of the country.
All the above referred 'Articles' of the Indian Constitution and 'Sections' of the Representation
of the People Acts 1950 and 1951 are based on the ill conceived definitions of the concepts of
"elector/voter"; "right to vote/electoral right" and "election". The following lines explain the
legislative definitions, judicial commentary, general comments and proposed definitions of (i)
"Elector/Voter"; (ii) "Right to Vote/Electoral Right" and (iii) "Election".
I. ELECTOR/VOTER:
A. Legislative Definition:
As per sub-section 2(e) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, "elector" in relation to a
constituency means a person whose name is entered in the electoral roll of that constituency
for the time being in force and who is not subject to any of the disqualifications mentioned in
Section 16 of the Representation of the People Act 1950 (43 of 1950).
As per explanation of Section 81 of the Representation of the People Act 1951, "Explanation: In
this sub-section, 'elector' means a person who was entitled to vote at the election to which the
election petition relates, whether he has voted at such election or not."
As per Article 326 of the Constitution of India, "elections to the House of the People and to the
Legislative Assemblies of States to be on the basis of adult suffrage - The elections to the
House of the People and to the Legislative Assembly of every State shall be on the basis of
adult suffrage; that is to say, every person who is a citizen of India and who is not less than
eighteen years of age on such date as may be fixed in that behalf by or under any law made by
the appropriate Legislature and is not otherwise disqualified under this Constitution or any law
made by the appropriate Legislature on the ground of non-residence, unsoundness of mind,
crime or corrupt or illegal practice, shall be entitled to be registered as a voter at any such
election"
B. Judicial Commentary:
On the concept of 'elector/voter', separate judicial commentary is not traceable. A right to
elect, fundamental though it is to democracy, is neither a fundamental right nor a common law
right, but pure and simple, a statutory right. Even otherwise there is no basis to say that the
right to vote and elect representatives of the State in the Council of States is a constitutional
right. Article 80(4) merely deals with the manner of election of the representatives in the
Council of States as an aspect of the composition of the Council of States. There is nothing in
the constitutional provisions declaring the right to vote in such election as an absolute right
under the Constitution: Kuldip Nayar V. Union of India AIR 2006 SC 3127 (a decision of five–
Judge Bench).
C. Comments:
The definition of "elector" given in the Representation of the People Act, 1951 and of 'voter'
given in Article 326 of the Constitution do not define the role of an individual 'elector/voter'.
The above definitions describe the legal identity of an Indian citizen as an "elector/voter".
According to these definitions of 'elector', every individual person whose name is entered in the
electoral roll of the constituency for the time being in force and who is not subject to any of
the disqualifications mentioned in section 16 of the Representation of the People Act 1950 (43
of 1950) MUST HAVE STATUTORY RIGHT (i) TO GET ELECTED AS REPRESENTATIVE OF HIS/HER
CONSTITUENCY/ELECTORAL COLLEGE and (ii) to elect representative oF his/her
constituency/electoral college. Can any law—constitutional or common or even statutory for
that matter — of any democratic country provide absolute right to every legitimate voter of the
country to get himself/HERself elected or to elect representative of his/her
constituency/electoral college signle– handedly? If not, then how he/she can be called an
"elector"? The real term is 'voter' rather than 'elector'.
D. Proposed Definition:
"A person whose name is entered in the electoral roll related to a particular constituency for
the time being in force and who is not subject to any disqualification as per the voters of the
constituency/electoral college, having equal opportunity-liberty-right to contest election and
to cast his/her vote in favour of the candidate nominated by himself/herself only, must be
designated as a 'voter'.
II. RIGHT TO VOTE/ELECTORAL RIGHT:
A. Legislative Definition:
As per Section 62 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, Right to Vote1. No person who is not, and except as expressly provided by this Act, every person who
is, for the time being entered in the electoral roll of any constituency shall be entitled
to vote in that constituency.
2. No person shall vote at an election in any constituency if he is subject to any of the
disqualifications referred to the Section 16 of the Representation of the People Act,
1950 (43 of 1950).
3. No person shall vote at a general election in more than one constituency of the same
class, and if a person votes in more than one such constituency, his votes in all such
constituencies shall be void.
4. No person shall at any election vote in the same constituency more than once,
notwithstanding that his name may have been registered in the electoral roll for the
constituency more than once, and if he does so vote, all his votes in that constituency
shall be void.
5. No person shall vote at any election if he is confined in a prison, whether under a
sentence of imprisonment or transportation or otherwise, or is in the lawful custody of
the police. Provided that nothing in this sub-section shall apply to a person subjected
to preventive detention under any law for the time being in force.
6. Nothing contained in sub-sections (3) and (4) shall apply to a person who has been
authorised to vote as proxy for an elector under this Act in so far as he votes as a proxy
for such elector.
As per sub-section 79(d) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, "electoral right" means
the right of a person to stand or not to stand as, or (to withdraw or not to withdraw) from
being, a candidate, or to vote or refrain from voting at an election.
B. Judicial Commentary:
"The right to vote or stand as a candidate for election is not a civil right but is a creature of
statute or special law and must be subject to the limitations imposed by it. Strictly speaking, it
is the sole right of the Legislature to examine and determine all matters relating to the
election of it's own members, and if the legislature takes it out of it's own hands and vests in a
special tribunal an entirely new and unknown jurisdiction, that special jurisdiction should be
exercised in accordance with the law which creates it."
Where a right or liability is created by a statute which gives a special remedy for enforcing it,
the remedy provided by that statute only must be availed of: in N.P. Ponnuswami v. Returning
Officer, Namakkal Constituency (1952) SCR 218: AIR 1952 SC 64: 1952 SCJ 100, and Jagan Nath
v. Jaswant Singh, AIR 1954 SC 210; 1954 SCR 892: 1954 SCJ 257.
"A right to elect, fundamental though it is to democracy, is, anomalously enough, neither a
fundamental right nor a common law right. It is pure and simple, a statutory right. So is the
right to be elected. So is the right to dispute an election. Outside of statute, there is no right
to elect, no right to be elected and no right to dispute an election. Statutory creations they
are, and, therefore, subject to statutory limitation": in Jyoti Basu and Others v. Debi Ghosal
and Others (1982) SCC 691.
"In our Constitution, it refers to denote 'people powers'. It stands for the actual, active and
effective exercise of power by the people in this regard." Article 170 incorporates the rule of
"fair and effective representation". Though the rule 'one person one vote' is a broad principle of
democracy, it is more a declaration of a political ideal than a mandate for enforcement with
arithmetical accuracy. In what is called 'first-past-the post' system of elections, the variation in
the size and the voting population of different constituencies, detract from a strict
achievement of this ideal. The system has the merit of preponderance of "decisiveness" over
"representativeness". The concept of political equality underlying a democratic system is a
political value. Perfect political equality is only ideological. The problem of equality of the
value of votes is further complicated by a progressive rival depopulation and increasing
urbanisation": in R.C. Pondyal V. U.O.I. 1994 Supp (1) SCC 324: AIR 1993 SC 1804 (a five-Judge
Bench decision) paras 108, 110, 113.
C. Comments:
All the six sub-sections of Section 62 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 describe
the situation in which a person/voter can or can not cast his/her vote at an election and the
situation in which his/her vote/votes would be valid or void. None of these sub-sections
describes the functional definition or the functional meaning of 'Right to Vote'.
The Constitution of India begins with the statement, "WE, THE PEOPLE OF INDIA, having
solemnly resolved to constitute India into a SOVEREIGN SOCIALIST SECULAR DEMOCRATIC
REPUBLIC and to secure to all its citizens":
JUSTICE, Social, economic and political;
LIBERTY of thought, expression, belief, faith and worship.
EQUALITY of status and opportunity; and to promote among them all FRATERNITY assuring the
dignity of the individual and the unity and integrity of the Nation;
IN OUR CONSTITUENT ASSEMBLY this twenty-sixth day of November, 1949, do HEREBY ADOPT,
ENACT AND GIVE TO OURSELVES THIS CONSTITUTION".
This implies that the Constituent Assembly of the country drafted the Constitution and the
Representation of the People Acts 1950 and 1951 for implementing Democratic Republic in
independent India. The concepts of sovereign, socialist and secular are the adjectives attached
to Democratic Republic. In Democratic Republic, "right to contest election" and "right to vote"
are the fundamental rights. They constitute the foundation for: (i) democratic rights; (ii)
evolving democratic structure of governance; and (iii) drafting the Constitution and Statute.
Therefore, the validity of "right to contest election" and "right to vote" can not and must not be
examined on the basis of Constitution and Statute. On the contrary, the Constitutional
institutions particularly legislature and judiciary must examine the validity of the Constitution
and Statute on the basis of "right to contest election" and "right to vote".
As regard the issues and doubts raised in the judicial commentary regarding political equality,
in Democratic Republic political status of a sovereign citizen becomes four tiers: (i) the citizen;
(ii) the voter; (iii) the contesting candidate; and (iv) the representative. In direct democracy,
every eligible citizen of the country directly participate (represent himself/herself) in
constituting and operating the single tier institution of governance. Therefore, in direct
democracy the political equality is always up to the political status of representative. In
Democratic Republic, participating voters of the constituency/electoral college elect their
representative out of themselves. Every sovereign citizen of democratic India is seriously and
genuinely concerned about his/her "political status" in Indian polity rather than "the value of
his/her vote" as envisaged in the judicial commentary. It is well known that social
equality/inequality is seen and examined from the angle of "social status" of the citizen in
caste hierarchy. Economic equality/inequality is seen and examined from the angle of
"economic status" of the citizen in income strata. Therefore, the issue of political
equality/inequality is directly related to the "political status" of the sovereign citizen of the
country in the four tiers political hierarchy. Division of "political status" of the sovereign
citizens of the country into "voters" and "contesting candidates" at the time of election causes
"political inequality" which is the root cause of all types of "cruelties"; "inequalities";
"injustices" and "insecurities" prevailing in India. "Right to contest election" and "right to vote"
are the two inseparable sides of one and the same coin, ie., "political equality". In the absence
of any one side, the coin of "political equality" and "inclusive democracy" are bound to be
incomplete. Absolute and unconditional "political equality" upto "the political status of
contesting candidate" would help in ensuring "dignity of the individual"; "liberty"; "equality";
"justice"; "perfect competition"; "inclusive democracy"; 'inclusive development"; "fraternity"
alongwith "unity and integrity of the Nation".
D. Proposed Definition:
The proposed definition of "Right to Vote' has already been explained in the first chapter of the
book. However, for ready reference, the same is being reproduced again. 'Right to Vote'
includes three inseparable and inter-related democratic sub-functions (a) to evaluate thoughtsexpressions-actions of every participating voter of the constituency/electoral college on the
basis of day-to-day interaction; (b) out of all the participating voters, including
himself/herself, of the constituency/electoral college to select/nominate the most suitable
voter as his/her contesting candidate; and (c) through ballot paper or any other media to
express his/her selection/nomination. In brief, 'Right to Vote' provides to every voter of the
constituency/electoral college equal opportunity-liberty-right to cast his/her vote in favour of
the candidate nominated by himself/herself only. For ensuring this, availability of every
participating voter of the constituency/electoral college for getting his/her thoughtsexpressions-actions evaluated by every participating voter of the constituency/electoral
college on the basis of day-to-day interaction, is a must. On the basis of this discussion, 'Right
to Vote' provides equal opportunity-liberty-right to contest election and to cast his/her vote in
favour of the candidate nominated by himself/herself only to every participating voter of the
constituency/electoral college in particular and of the country in general.
III. ELECTION:
A. Legislative Definition:
As per sub-section 2(d) of the Representation of the People Act 1951, "election" means an
election to fill a seat or seats in either House of Parliament or in the House or either House of
the Legislature of a State other than the State of Jammu and Kashmir.
B. Judicial Commentary:
"The word 'election' has by long usage in connection with the process of selection of proper
representatives in democratic institutions acquired both a wide and a narrow meaning. In the
narrow sense it is used to mean the final selection of a candidate which may embrace the
result of the poll when there is polling, or a particular candidate being returned unopposed
when there is no poll. In the wide sense, the word is used to connote the entire process
culminating in a candidate being declared elected and it is in this wide sense that the word is
used in Part XV of the Constitution in which Article 329(b) occurs".
Held by the Full Court (Patanjali Shastri, C.J. Fazal Ali, Mahajan, Mukherjee, Das and
Chandrashekhar Aiyer J.J.) that in view of the provisions of the Article 329 (b) of the
Constitution and section 80 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, the High Court had
no jurisdiction to interfere with the order of Returning Officer in N.P. Ponnuswami v. Returning
Officer, Namakkal Constituency, 1952 SCR 218: ASR 1952 SC 64: 952 SCJ: 100.
C. Comments:
In respect of the definition of the concept of 'election', following arguments given by the
advocate on behalf of petitioner N.P. Ponnuswami before the Hon'ble Supreme Court seem to
be quite logical and genuine:
1. That the word "election" as used in Article 329(b), means what it normally and
etymologically means, namely, the result of polling or the final selection of a
candidate.
2. That the fact that an election petition can be filed after polling is over or after a
candidate is declared elected and what is normally called in question by such petition
is the final result, bears out the contention that the word "election" "can have no other
meaning in Article 329(b) than the result of polling or the final selection of a
candidate".
There is a very popular proverb, i.e. "garbage in, garbage out". The following lines describe the
quality and nature of the output of the existing process of election - elected members of Lok
Sabha and State Assemblies. "The court order awarding death and life imprisonment to Anand
Mohan and Lovely Mohan has sent shivers down the spines of many more politicians in Bihar
against whom criminal cases are pending. Some influential politicians mainly MPs and MLAs, are
facing trial and for some others verdicts could come any day. Those in the line of fire include
MPs Prabhunath Singh (JD-U) and Surajbhan Singh (LJP); Suspended JD(U) MLA Narendra Pandey
alias Sunil Pandey and former MLA Rajan Tewary. Another MP Rajesh Ranjan alias Pappu Yadav
of RJD is also in the queue............... RJD strongman and Siwan MP Mohammad Shahabuddin
has been convicted and punished in four separate cases including life term in one of them"
(Ahmad, 2007). "Secularism, terrorism and social evils have become useful tools for our
plundering politicians from the day the country was divided into two. Black money, terrorists,
bombs and contract killings have become a reality" (Raj, 2007). "Constitution expert Subhash
Kashyap says that the prestige of Parliament has been gradually eroded due to the conduct of
members cutting across parties." It has been happening for some time now-not just in the
present Lok Sabha. Those who are supporting the government and blaming the Opposition now
were behaving in exactly the same manner as the Opposition during the previous Lok Sabha.
They did not allow the House to function day after day, session after session" says Kashyap
(Ghosh, 2007).
"The extent to which security has been compromised is touched upon by former joint director
of IB Maloy Krishna Dhar in his new book, 'Fulcrum of Evil: ISI-CIA-AI Qaida Nexus'. He has
suggested that a CM of a North Indian State had links with ISI and that he had been under IB's
scanner "for maintaining questionable clandestine links". Dhar did not identify the CM only for
the fear of being hauled in a court for defamation. Prodded by TOI he limited himself to, "he
was a CM from a North Indian State." In the political circles, however, it is not difficult to
hazard a guess about the identity of the stalwart. Dhar's colleagues in IB, both serving and
retired, confirm Dhar was not engaging in a sales overpitch for his book. "Political interference
is rampant and is increasing. What is shocking is the complete lack of sensitisation to the
threat "a senior IB official, pleading anonymity, told TOI. A retired officer, who handled a
crucial anti-terror station in the IB, concurred. There have been so many cases where our tipoff and suggestions for action have generated "identity not confirmed" response-meaning
reluctance to proceed. An immediate case in point is Andhra Pradesh. Despite interrogation
reports of captured terrorists pointing to RDX consignments reaching Hyderabad, the police was
not allowed to pick up suspected sympathisers of terror outfits for questioning. It is only after
August 25 twin blasts that brothers of the main accused Mohd. Shahid, or Bilal, were
questioned. It took 43 deaths for the police to visit "politically sensitive" parts of the Walled
City to question establishments suspected of radicalising youth. The reason, "reluctance to
annoy a political party which is supporting regimes in the state and at the Centre" (Deshpande
and Mohan, 2007).
D. Proposed Definition:
Although, the proposed definition of 'election' has already been explained in the first chapter
of the book, yet for ready reference the same is being reproduced here. "Election expresses
communitarian choice of the participating voters of the constituency/electoral college. To be
more specific, election expresses the level of agreement among the participating voters of the
constituency/electoral college in respect of every participating voter of the
constituency/electoral college. Level of agreement is a scale. The least count of this scale is
complete disagreement among the participating voters and the highest count is complete
agreement among participating voters in respect of a particular participating voter of the
constituency/electoral college. In case of complete disagreement, every participating voter
gets one vote only and in case of complete agreement, every participating voter of the
constituency/ electoral college casts his/her vote in favor of one and the same participating
voter of the constituency/electoral college. Generally, the real situation is in between
complete disagreement and complete agreement.
According to the above concept of election, every voter of the constituency/electoral college
irrespective of the level of governance casts his/her vote in favor of any participating voter of
the constituency/electoral college, including himself/herself. The voters getting the highest,
the second highest and the third highest number of votes are to be declared elected. For
special circumstances, special provisions are a must. In a democratic system of governance, the
procedure for election must be based on the 'Rule of Maximum Vote'. In the 'Rule of Maximum
Vote', the number of contesting candidates are always equal to the number of participating
voters of the constituency/electoral college.
The word "election" includes two major aspects. They are: (i) process of election, and (ii)
procedure for election. Process of election further covers three elements: (a) inputs-contesting
candidates, "equal opportunity-liberty-right to every voter of the constituency/electoral
college to contest election; (b) processing-casting of votes", equal opportunity-liberty-right to
every voter of the constituency/electoral college to cast his/her vote in favour of the
candidate nominated by himself/herself only; (c) returned candidate: so called representative
of the voters of the constituency/electoral college. The Constitution - the Statute- the
Institutional Structure of Governance- the Procedure for Election must have evolved the
"Process of Election" ensuring equal opportunity-liberty-right to contest election and to cast
his/her vote in favour of the candidate nominated by himself/herself only to every voter of the
constituency/electoral college in particular and of the country in general.
IV.BAR TO INTERFERENCE BY COURTS IN ELECTORAL MATTERS:
For immunizing the ill conceived definitions of the above mentioned concepts from judicial
review, the Constituent Assembly included Article 329 in Part XV of the Constitution and
Section 80 in the Representation of the People Act, 1951.
A. Legislative Definitions:
Article 329. Bar to interference by courts in electoral matters - (Notwithstanding anything in
this Constitution1):
a) the validity of any law, relating to the delimitation of constituencies or the allotment
of seats to such constituencies, made or purporting to be made under Article 327 or
Article 328, shall not be called in question in any court;
b) no election to either House of Parliament or to the House or either House of the
Legislature of a State shall be called in question except by an election petition
presented to such authority and in such manner as may be provided for by or under any
law made by the appropriate Legislature.
Section 80- The Representation of the People Act, 1951. Election Petitions. No election shall
be called in question except by an election petition presented in accordance with the
provisions of this part.
1. The court having jurisdiction to try an election petition shall be the High Court.
2. Such jurisdiction shall be exercised ordinarily by a single Judge of the High Court and
the Chief Justice, shall from time to time, assign one or more Judges for that purpose:
Provided that where the High Court consists only of one Judge, he shall try all election
petitions presented to that Court.
3. The High Court in its discretion may, in the interest of justice or convenience try an
election petition, wholly or partly, at a place other than the place of seat of the High
Court.
B. Judicial Commentary:
"The word 'election' in Article 329(b) was used in a comprehensive sense as including the entire
process of election commencing with the issue of a notification and terminating with the
declaration of election of a candidate and that an application under Article 226 challenging the
validity of any of the Acts forming part of that process, would be barred - Hari Vishnu Kamath
v. Ahmad Ishaque AIR 1955 SC 233.
"Article 329(b) excludes the jurisdiction of the High Courts to deal with any matter which may
arise while the elections are in progress"- N.P. Ponnuswami v. Returning Officer AIR 952, SC 64.
"The court must be very circumspect and act with caution while entertaining any election
dispute though not hit by the bar of Article 329(b) but brought to it during the pendancy of
election proceedings. The court must guard against any attempt of retarding, interrupting,
protracting or stalling of such proceedings"- Election Commission of India v. Ashok Kumar (2000)
8 SCC 216.
"The presumption is always of the existence of bona fides in the discharge of constitutional and
statutory functions by the constitutional institutions and functionaries such as Election
Commission, Chief Electoral Officer or Electoral Registration Officers. Until that presumption is
displaced, it is not just or proper to act on pre-conceived notions and to prevent public
authorities from discharging functions clothed upon them"- A.K.M. Hassan Uzzaman v. U.O.I.
(1982) 2 SCC 218.
"Once an election is over, the aggrieved candidate will have to pursue his remedy in
accordance with the provisions of law and the High Court will not ordinarily interfere with the
elections under Article 226. The High Court will not ordinarily interfere where there is an
appropriate or equally efficacious remedy available particularly in relation to election disputes"
in Umesh Shivappa Ambi v. Amgadi Shekara Basappa (1998) 4 SCC 529.
"A dispute regarding election to the Legislative Council of a State can be raised only under the
provisions contained in Part VI of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 by filing an
election petition and not by filing a writ petition before the High Court"- Election Commission
of India v. Shivaji AIR 1988 SC 61: (1988) SCC 277.
"Once an election process has been set in motion, the High Court would not be justified in
interfering with the process giving direction to the election officer to stall the proceedings or
to conduct the election process afresh, though the High Court may entertain or may have
already entertained a writ petition"- in Boddula v. State of Election Commissioner A.P. (1996) 3
SCC 416; see Ramachandra v. State of Maharashtra (1993) 4 SCC 216: AIR 1994 SC 1673; Gujarat
University v. N.U. Rajguru AIR 1988 SC 66; Manda Jagannath v. K.S. Rathnam (2004) SCC 492:.
C. Comments:
Usage of word 'elector' in place of the word 'voter' has destroyed the theoretical and legal base
of "Right to Vote". 'To elect' and 'to be elected' can be neither democratic rights; nor
constitutional rights and nor statutory rights. On the contrary, in democratic system of
governance 'Right to Contest Election' and 'Right to Vote' must be democratic-fundamentalconstitutional-statutory rights. Bar to interference by courts in electoral matters can be
justified only and only after ensuring equal opportunity-liberty-right to contest election and to
cast his/her vote in favor of the candidate nominated by himself/herself only to every voter of
the country. Judiciary is supposed to direct legislature to amend the existing undemocratic
multi-party based five-tier centralized top-to-bottom institutional structure of governance and '
the first-past-the post' and 'Rule of Majority Vote' based undemocratic procedure for election.
The desired amendment would help : (i) in defining the concepts of 'voter'; 'right to vote' and
'election' on the basis of their inherent essence and spirit; (ii) in destroying the combination of
undemocratic structures of the tools implementing multi-party based five-tier centralized topto-bottom institutional structure of governance; (ii) in preparing favorable circumstances for
the adoption of partyless six-tier decentralized bottom-to-top institutional structure of
governance, and (iv) in ensuring direct and indirect participation of every willing voter of the
country in (a) constituting-operating the partyless six-tier decentralized bottom-to-top
institutional structure of governance, and (b) formulating and implementing systems,
institutions, policies, laws, acts, rules and programmes necessary for the existence- survivalgrowth- welfare of every citizen of the country.
D. Proposed Definition:
Partyless six-tier decentralised bottom-to-top institutional structure of governance and "Rule of
Maximum Vote" based procedure for election evolved for ensuring equal opportunity-libertyright to contest election and to cast his/her vote in favour of the candidate nominated by
himself/herself only to every voter of the constituency/electoral college in particular and of
the country in general, have been explained in the first chapter. The same have been
summarised in the following table on next page.
TABLE: SUMMARY OF THE PROPOSED INSTITUTIONAL STRUCTURE OF GOVERNANCE AND
PROCEDURE FOR ELECTION
Structure of Governance
1. Ward :
(A Geographical area
having around two
hundred population).
2.
Village/Mohalla: (Ten
wards).
3. Cluster of
Villages/Mohallas:
(Ten Villages/ Mohallas).
Besides
Chairman,
number of
members of
institution
governance
Around
150-180
10
10
the
the
the
the
of
Procedure of Election
1. Every participating voter of the
constituency/ electoral college would
also be a contesting candidate
ensuring Equal Opportunity in Getting
Elected/Absolute and Unconditional
Political Equality upto the level of
Contesting Candidate.
2. Every participating voter of the
constituency/
electoral
college
irrespective of the level of governance
casts his/her vote in favour of any
participating
voter
of
the
constituency/electoral
college
including himself/herself.
3. The voters getting the highest, the
second highest and the third highest
number of votes are to be declared
elected as representatives of the
concerned
constituency/electoral
college.
4. For special circumstances special
provisions are a must.
5. The voters getting the highest number
of votes would form the institution of
governance at the level of his/ her
constituency/electoral college. He/she
would perform the role of the
Chairperson and would not represent
any constituency/electoral college.
6. Except the voter getting the second
highest number of votes all other
4. District:
(Twenty clusters of
Villages/Mohallas).
20
5. State:
(Twenty Five Districts).
25
6. Nation:
(One Hundred & Ten
States).
110
voters of the constituency/electoral
college would be the member of the
concerned institution of governance.
At a time, a voter can not be the
member of more than one institution
of governance.
7. The voter getting the second highest
number of votes would represent all
the voters of his/her constituency/
electoral college at the next level of
governance. On behalf of his/her
constituency/electoral college, he/she
would participate in building and
operating the institution of governance
at this level and would also perform
the roles of a voter and contesting
candidate in the election to be held at
this level.
8. If the need arises, in order to ensure
the
representation
of
his/her
constituency/electoral college at the
next level institution of governance,
the voter getting the third highest
number of votes would replace the
voter getting the second highest
number of votes. In this situation
he/she would not be the member of
the lower
level institution
of
governance.
9. This procedure for election would
continue upto the national level.
10. The election of the representatives
constituting
the
institution
of
governance at the next level would be
held after a period of six months from
the
date
of
constituting
the
institutions of governance for one
lower level. All the concerned
representatives would attend all the
sessions of the concerned institution of
governance without right to vote.
During this period they would get an
opportunity to interact with each
other behaviourally.
11. The resolution passed and approved by
the
concerned
institution
of
governance against any of its member
would disqualify him/her for being the
basic voter till the end of the next
election.
V. CONSTITUTIONAL VALIDITY:
Though Article 368 authorises Parliament to amend the Constitution, it has been held by a
Bench of 13-Judge in Kesavananda Bharati's case (1973) 4 SCC 225 that though Parliament is
empowered to amend the Constitution, yet by such amendment the basic and essential
features of the Constitution can not be changed or altered. This well-accepted principle is
reiterated in L. Chandra Kumar v. Union of India (1997) 3SCC 261. Without discussing the
recent stand of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of the country on 'Constitutional Validity' of the laws
and acts to be included in the Ninth Schedule and amendment of the Constitution, the judicial
commentary seems to be incomplete. The following lines explain the logics of Constitutional
Validity.
Constitution of India - Arts. 368, 31-B r/w Sch. IX and Part III - Laws included in Sch. IX after
24-4-1973, and the constitutional amendments inserting such laws, which affect fundamental
rights or the principles underlying/essence of fundamental rights - Protection available to such
laws and validity of such constitutional amendments - Scope and effect of inclusion of such
laws in Sch. IX - Applicability of basic structure doctrine - Scope of judicial review - Held,
Parliament has power to amend provisions of Part III so as to abridge or take away fundamental
rights, but that power is subject to limitation of basic structure doctrine - Hence, all
constitutional amendments made on or after 24-4-1973 by which Sch. IX is amended by
inclusion of various laws, and the laws so included in Sch. IX, shall have to be tested on the
touchstone of basic structure doctrine as reflected in Art. 21 r/w Art. 14 and Art. 19; Art. 15
and Art. 14 r/w Arts. 16(4), (4-A) & (4-B); Arts. 20 and 32, etc., and the principles underlying
them, or if the law(s) concerned infringe the essence of fundamental rights.
Constitution of India - Arts. 368, 31-B r/w Sch. IX, 32 and Pt. III - Laws included in Sch. IX after
24-4-1973, and the constitutional amendments inserting such laws, which affect fundamental
rights or the principles underlying/essence of fundamental rights - Extent and nature of judicial
scrutiny attracted - Factors to be considered, tests to be applied and exercise to be undertaken
by Court - Necessity to take synoptic view of Pt. III/ Constitution - Standards to be applied
depending on context - Held, every addition to Sch. IX triggers Art. 32 as part of the basic
structure and is consequently subject to the review of fundamental rights as they stand in Pt.
III.
—Individual examination of each law/constitutional amendment – The laws that are included in
Sch. IX have to be examined individually for determining whether the constitutional
amendments by which they are put in Sch. IX damage or destroy the basic structure of the
Constitution.
—Impact or "rights test" and "essence of right" test– The actual or direct effect and impact of
the impugned Sch. IX law on the rights guaranteed under Pt. III has to be considered for
determining whether or not the law destroys the basic structure - Focus of Court is on the
actual impairment caused by the law, rather than the literal validity of the law - This means
that the form of the amendment is not the relevant factor; but the consequence thereof would
be the determinative factor; this is the "rights test" - When in a controlled constitution
conferring limited power of amendment, an entire chapter is made inapplicable as in the case
of insertion of a law into Sch. IX under Art. 31-B, "essence of the right" test as applied in M
Nagaraj, (2006) 8 SCC 212 [Ed.: see Shortnote U, para 37 therein], will have no applicability In such a situation, it is the "rights test" which is more appropriate, which requires a synoptic
view to be taken of the Constitution/fundamental rights chapter.
—Synoptic view– As fundamental rights are interconnected, one has to take a synoptic view of
the various articles in Pt. III while judging the impact of Sch. IX laws on the articles in Pt.
III/Constitution.
—Compatibility test– Basic structure doctrine requires the State to justify the degree of
invasion of fundamental rights - Greater the invasion into essential freedoms, greater is the
need for justification and determination by Court whether invasion was necessary, and if so, to
what extent - Degree of invasion is for the Court and not Parliament to decide - Parliament is
presumed to legislate compatibly with the fundamental rights and this is where judicial review
comes in -Compatibility is one of the species of judicial review in which one has to see the
effect of the impugned law on one hand and exclusion of Pt. III under Art. 31-B in its entirety
at the will of Parliament on the other.
—Standard to be applied– The extent of invasion of various freedoms that is permissible varies
depending upon the context - Thus, application of a standard to determine the extent of
invasion of freedoms that is permissible in a particular context is an important exercise to be
undertaken by the Court in applying the basic structure doctrine -This exercise can be
undertaken by the Court alone and not the prescribed authority under Art. 368.
—Step-wise approach– For determining whether the impugned Sch. IX law which affects
fundamental rights violates the basic structure, Court has to first find out whether the
impugned Sch. IX law is violative of Pt. III - If it finds in the affirmative, the further
examination to be undertaken by the Court is whether the violation is found destructive of the
basic structure - If this is found in the affirmative also, the result would be invalidation of the
Sch. IX law concerned - Instances discussed:
Constitution of India - Arts. 14, 15, 16, 31-B r/w Sch. IX and Art. 368 - Laws included in Sch. IX
after 24-4-1973, and the constitutional amendments inserting such laws, affecting fundamental
rights under Arts. 14, 15 and 16 - Considerations involved in testing validity of - Balancing of
general right of equality under Art. 14 with that under Art. 15(4) when excessiveness is
detected in grant of protective discrimination - Balancing of formal equality enshrined in Art.
16(1) with egalitarian equality enshrined in Art. 16(4).
Constitution of India - Pt. III - Fundamental rights - Nature of - Interconnectedness of
fundamental rights, reiterated.
Constitution of India - Arts. 368, 31-B r/w Sch. IX and Pt. III - Constitutional amendments
affecting fundamental rights - Testing on touchstone of basic structure - Application of a
standard to determine the extent of invasion of freedoms permissible in a particular context Authority competent therefore, held, is the Court and not Parliament.
Constitution of India - Arts. 14, 15, 16, 19, 20, 21, 32 and 31-B r/w Sch. IX and 368 Fundamental rights that are part of the basic structure of the Constitution - Held, Art. 21 r/w
Art. 14 and Art. 19; Art. 15 and Art. 14 r/w Arts. 16(4), (4-A) & (4-B); Arts. 20 and 32, etc.,
including the principles or essence underlying them, are part of the basic structure of the
Constitution.
Constitution of India - Arts. 14, 31-B r/w Sch. IX and 368 - Nature of Art. 14 - Extent to which
part of the basic structure of the Constitution - Held, essence of the principle behind Art. 14 is
part of the basic structure - In fact, essence or principle of the right or nature of violation is
more important than equality in the abstract or formal sense.
Constitution of India - Pt. III and Arts. 31-B r/w Sch. IX and 368 - Amendability of fundamental
rights - Permissibility and extent of - Held, Parliament has power to amend provisions of Pt. III
so as to abridge or take away fundamental rights, but that power is subject to limitation of
basic structure doctrine.
Constitution of India - Arts. 368 and 31-B r/w Sch. IX - Elements of basic structure of the
Constitution - Instances of - Reiterated, that secularism, separation of powers, equality and
judicial review are basic features of Constitution and essential elements of the rule of law Rule of Law.
Constitution of India - Art. 19(1)(a) - Freedom of Press - If part of freedom guaranteed under
Art. 19(1)(a) - Reiterated, that freedom of press which, though not separately and specifically
guaranteed, has been read as part of Art. 19(1)(a).
Constitution of India - Pt. III and Preamble - Secularism - Repositories of, in the Constitution Held, secular character of the Constitution is a matter of conclusion to be drawn from various
articles conferring fundamental rights - If the secular character is not to be found in Pt. III, it
cannot be found anywhere else in the Constitution because every fundamental right in Pt. III
stands either for a principle or a matter of detail.
Constitution of India - Pt. III - Fundamental rights - Contents of - Held, every fundamental right
in Pt. III stands either for a principle or a matter of detail.
Constitution of India - Pt. III and Arts. 14, 15 and 16 - Existence of social content in
fundamental rights - View taken in M. Nagaraj, (2006) 8 SCC 212, reiterated.
Constitution of India - Arts. 368 and 31-B r/w Sch. IX - Applicability of basic structure doctrine Factors to be considered - Held, developments made in the field of constitutional
interpretation and expansion of judicial review shall have to be kept in view while deciding the
applicability of the basic structure doctrine in I.R.Coelho v. State of T.N. (1999) 7 SCC 580.
VI. VICIOUS CIRCLE OF CONSTITUTIONAL DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC:
Intellectuals and judicial commentary placed in the previous and this chapters respectively
apparently confirm the doubts envisaged by Dr. B.R. Ambedkar and Dr. Rajendra Prasad about
the working of the "operators-amendors" of the Constitution. The commentary also confirms
the failure of multi-party based five-tier centralised top-to-bottom institutional structure of
governance and 'the first-past-the post' system and 'Rule of Majority Vote' based procedure for
election in blocking the continuation of dynastic rule and implementing Democratic Republic in
independent India. Since last sixty years, the 'operators-amendors' of the Constitution are being
elected and re-elected and 'multi-party based five-tier centralised top-to-bottom institutional
structure of governance' and 'the first-past-the post' system and 'Rule of Majority Vote' based
procedure for election, are being constituted-operated-amended as per the provisions laid
down in the Constitution and the Representation of the People Act. This implies that the fault
does not lie with the operators-amendors of the Constitution as envisaged by Dr. B.R.
Ambedkar and Dr. Rajendra Prasad and confirmed by the intellectuals and judicial
commentary. In fact, fault lies with the 'multi-party based five-tier centralised top-to-bottom
institutional structure of governance, and 'the first-past-the post' system and 'Rule of Majority
Vote' based procedure for election evolved by the Constituent Assembly of India or with their
evolution.
The most unfortunate part of the story is that the 'multi-party based five-tier centralised topto-bottom institutional structure of governance' and 'the first-past-the-post' system and 'Rule of
Majority Vote' based procedure for election insulate the existence- survival-growth of the
Political Parties and their leaders. For their existence-survival-growth, the Political Parties and
their leaders were/are bound to protect their insulator. As evident from their opinions
available in the third chapter of the book, Dr. B.R. Ambedkar and Dr. Rajendra Prasad were
very much clear about the obvious and natural psychology-intention of the Political Parties and
their leaders to rule independent India indefinitely. In spite of this, the Constituent Assembly
provided Article 368 to the Political Parties and their leaders for insulating their own insulatorunbreakable Vicious Circle of Constitutional Democratic Republic- from public action through
referendum. In brief, in the name of democracy the Constituent Assembly provided an
unbreakable Vicious Circle of Constitutional Democratic Republic to the sovereign citizens of
independent India. The following lines explain (i) the aspects involved in the unbreakable
Vicious Circle of Constitutional Democratic Republic; (ii) their cause-effect relationship; and
(iii) point for attack.
Wide spread unemployment-underemployment-income disparity-poverty-corruption; rapid
population growth; rapid deterioration in the cultural-social-human values; criminalisation of
systems, institutions and individuals, instable governance are the obvious outcome of the
systems, institutions, policies, acts, laws, rules and programmes formulated and implemented
by the selfish-opportunist-dishonest-egoist-corrupt-criminal-legislators of independent India.
\
\
\
The selfish-opportunist-dishonest-egoist-corrupt-criminal-legislators of independent India are
the obvious outcome of multi-party based five-tier centralised top-to-bottom institutional
structure of governance and 'the first-past-the post' and 'Rule of Majority Vote' based procedure
for election.
\
\
\
Multi-party based five-tier centralised top-to-bottom institutional structure of governance and
'the first-past-the post' and 'Rule of Majority Vote' based procedure for election are the obvious
outcome of the compulsion on the part of the voter to endorse the choice of one or the other
political party or of any independent candidate.
\
\
\
Compulsion on the part of the voter to endorse the choice of one or the other political party or
of any independent candidate is the obvious outcome of ill conceived definitions of the
concepts of 'elector (voter)', 'right to vote', (electoral right) and 'election'.
\
\
\
The ill conceived definitions of the concepts of 'elector (voter)', 'right to vote', (electoral right)
and 'election' on one hand converted 'right to vote' into 'right to endorse the choice of one or
the other political party or of any independent candidate" and on the other hand destroyed the
theoretical and legal base provided by the definition of democracy and the very first statement
of the Constitution respectively to every voter of the country, i.e., equal opportunity-libertyright to contest election and to cast his/her vote in favour of the candidate nominated by
himself/herself only.
VII. CONCLUSION:
Prima facie the role of judiciary in Democratic Republic is to interpret the laws formulated by
the legislature of the country. The trinity, the Preamble, the Fundamental Rights in Part-III and
Directive Principales of State Policy in Chapter IV of the Constitution provide guidelines to the
legislature and judiciary for formulating and interpreting laws respectively. Most of the
constitutional amendments have always been to restrict fundamental rights of the sovereign
citizens. First amendment, 4th amendment, then these obnoxious amendmends just before and
after the emergency– the 39th to 48th amendments. Through the first amendment, Parliament
included Ninth Schedule in the Constitution. Ninth Schedule immunizes all the laws included
and to be included in it from judicial review. At present there are 284 laws in Ninth Schedule.
Legislative encroachment by the legislature through constitutional amendments upon the
human rights in broader sense provided by the trinity to the sovereign Indian citizens forced as
well as encouraged the judiciary to introduce the doctrines of "basic structure of the
Constitution" and "constitutional validity" for reviewing the laws formulated by the legislature
judicially. Also, through it's innovative mechanism of Public Interest Litigation, judiciary has
tried to reach the deprived sections of the society.
As per judgement of Supreme Court of the country in case of Rameshwar Prasad and Others v.
Union of India and Another [2006] 2SCC, dissolution of Bihar Assembly on 23.5.2005 was
unconstitutional. According to this judgement for forming the government in Bihar, majority of
ideology based political party was not the requirement of the Constitution. Irrelevance and
constitutional invalidity of the ideology based party system in constituting Assembly and
forming Government in Bihar after Assembly election held in February, 2005, is the most
important hidden side of the judgments for future course of action. Supreme Court judgments
are bindings; they are law under Article 141.
For immunizing the foundation of the Vicious Circle of Constitutional Democratic Republic; i.e.
ill conceived definitions of the concepts of 'voters'; 'right to vote' election from judicial review,
the Constituent Assembly included Article 329 in the Constitution and Section 80 in the
Representation of the People Act 1951. It seems that it was/is in the interest of the Political
Parties and their leaders to keep the main pillar of democracy – 'Voter' – identity-less and
powerless. Most of the occasions, the 'voter' has been called either as an 'elector' or as a
'person'. The existing procedure for election does not provide freedom of choice or equal
opportunity-liberty-right to contest election and to cast his/her vote in favor of the candidate
nominated by himself/herself only to every voter of the country. As regard the 'rule of law' and
'law of land', if laws are based on the ill conceived definitions of the concepts of 'elector', 'right
to vote' and 'election' then the possibility to get justice from judiciary is remote.
Implementation of Sovereign Socialist Secular Democratic Republic in independent India was/is
the ultimate end whereas the Constitution and the Representation of the People Act, were/are
the means. In these circumstances, the constitutional institutions in general and the judiciary
in particular has to decide the priority between the Constitutional Validity and the Democratic
Validity. In case of Democratic Validity, the validity of the existing institutional structure of
governance; procedure for election; the Representation of the People Acts, 1950 and 1951 and
of the Constitution itself must be examined on the basis of "democratic rights of the voter" i.e.
equal opportunity-liberty-right to contest election and to cast his/her vote in favor of the
candidate nominated by himself/herself only to every voter of the country. The judicial
commentary available in this chapter on the ill conceived legislative definitions of the concepts
of 'voter' , 'right to vote' and 'election', seems to be quite against the inherent essence and
spirit of the concept of Democratic Republic. "Redressal of the damage done to India and
Indians demands immediate replacement of the present process of politicization by the process
of socialization."
CHAPTER - 5
SUMMARY
"All members of parliament, young and old, members of cabinet, journalists as well as common
citizens are concerned about administrative apathy, corruption and India's failure to provide
promised benefits to the poor. The situation in this respect has become worse over time
irrespective of which party or persons are in power. Hardly a day goes by when we do not read
about India's high ranking in the global corruption index and a dismal ranking in human
development, poverty alleviation, hunger, illiteracy and health. The issue that must be faced is
that the problem is now "systemic", and not "episodic". It is not related to the quality of
persons or parties in power" (Jalan, 2007). "The current system, despite brave efforts by the
election commission, is something that suits criminals most and that's why politics in India
remains mainly their domain. Last time I wrote in this very column about my excitement at
seeing Rahul Gandhi and the younger brigade taking up serious roles in Indian politics, but as I
sat down thinking later, I felt that even they all will become criminalized in times to come,
thanks to the system" (Chaudhari, 2007).
As stated at the end of the second chapter of the book, for blocking the continuation of the
dynastic rule and for implementing Sovereign Socialist Secular Democratic Republic in
independent India, the Constituent Assembly provided the following combination: "multi-party
based five-tier centralised top-to-bottom institutional structure of governance……..
constituted…….. as per 'the first-past-the post' and 'Rule of Majority Vote'……. operated ……. by
the opportunists". After ninety-four amendments in the Constitution, the combination
remained more or less the same. Alongwith selfish- opportunist- dishonest- egoist- corruptcriminal legislatores, the combination has yielded the following results.
1. Initiated the process of politicization of multi-party based five-tier centralised top-tobottom institutional structure of governance. The process of politicization has
completed it's journey after politicising the criminal systems, institutions, and
individuals.
2. Promoted the dynastic rule through political parties which blocked the implementation
of Democratic Republic in independent India.
3. Forced to adopt justification-authority based evaluation-monitoring mechanism
creating very wide space and scope for corruption.
4. Forced to adopt punitive measures for sensitizing human emotions, sentiments,
thoughts and overall behaviour which have miserably failed.
5. Made the democratic rights of the voter, i.e., equal opportunity-liberty-right to contest
election and to cast his/her vote in favour of the candidate nominated by
himself/herself only impractical, non-implementable and utopian.
6. Made the Parliament and State Assemblies the shadow of the Political Parties.
7. Formulation of coalition governments on the basis of 'Rule of Majority Vote' made the
ideology based multi-party system irrelevant and the institution of government
instable.
8. Election of the Members of Lok-Sabha and State Assemblies on the basis of 'the firstpast-the post' system promoted the entry of the opportunists into the system of
governance.
9. Made the concepts of 'Stateless Society', 'Swaraj', Gram-Swaraj', 'Partyless Democracy'
and 'Lok-Umidwar impractical, irrelevant and utopian.
10. Converted the sovereign institutions of candidate, representative and government into
the slave ones of the Political Parties.
11. Divided the citizens of India vertically upto the level of local society on the basis of
caste and creed into the Political Parties.
Intellectuals and judicial commentary placed in the previous two chapters explain the above
mentioned obvious outcome of the "multi-party based five-tier centralised top-to-bottom
institutional structure of governance" which has been evolved-constituted-operated-amended
by the legislators of independent India. The new and the old constitutors-operators-amenders
(legislators) are elected and re-elected respectively as per prevailing procedure for election
which has again been evolved-operated-amended by the legislators of independent India. Since
independence, Constitutional Democratic Republic in general and "multi-party based five-tier
centralised top-to-bottom institutional structure of governance" in particular have been
constituted-operated-amended as per the Constitutional Democratic Republic and procedure
for election evolved by the Constituent Assembly. As such, the reponsibility of the undesirable
obvious outcome of the "multi-party based five-tier centralised top-to-bottom institutional
structure of governance" does not lie with the constitution-operation-amendment of the
Constitutional Democratic Republic; "multi-party based five-tier centralised top-to-bottom
institutional structure of governance" and 'the first-past-the post' system and Rule of Majority
Vote based procedure for election. It lies with the EVOLUTION of the "multi-party based fivetier centralised top-to-bottom institutional structure of governance" and 'the first-past-the
post' system and "Rule of Majority Vote" based undemocratic procedure for election.
For immunizing the Vicious Circle of Constitutional Democratic Republic and "multi-party based
five-tier centralised top-to-bottom institutional structure of governance" from public action
through referendum, the Constituent Assembly included Article 368 in Indian Constitution and
for immunising prevailing procedure for election and ill conceived definitions of the concepts
of "elector/voters"; "right to vote/electoral right" and "election" from judicial review, it
included Article 329 in the Constitution and Section 80 in the Representation of the People Act,
1951. The following lines explain the character of the Vicious Circle of Constitutional
Democratic Republic in terms of (i) Sovereign-Socialist-Secular, and (ii) Democratic Republic.
I. SOVEREIGN-SOCIALIST-SECULAR:
Who is sovereign? The president of India? Who has to accept the advice of the Cabinet, the
Political Party in Power?
THE PARLIAMENT? The shadow of the Political Parties.
THE JUDICIARY? The interpretor of the Laws and Acts formulated by the Political Parties
through Parliament and State Assemblies.
THE EXECUTIVE? "too often, political strings are pulled to see that the case does not reach the
chargesheet stage and is closed and if a chargesheet is filed but the politician gets acquitted,
then no appeal is filed, sample these:

CBI did not get permission to file appeals against Ottavio Quattrocchi in Argentina in
the extradition case.

No appeal filed against "Hinduja brothers" acquittal in Bofors case.

It first did not get permission to file chargesheet against Mayawati, when it did, there
was no sanction from the Governor.

It did not get the nod to file appeal against acquittal of Lalu Prasad and Rabri Devi in
the disproportionate assets case.

Permission was denied to file appeals against acquittal of Ajit Jogi and his son Amit
Jogi in separate cases." (Mahapatra, 2007)

The voter? He/she has to endorse the choice of one or the other Political Party or of
any independent candidate in the name of 'Right to Vote' at the election.
In Democratic Republic, 'voter' is the only Constitutional Institution who is sovereign to
make choice in nominating his/her contesting candidate at the time of election. All other
Constitutional Institutions – The President; The Parliament; The Judiciary; The Executive –
are bound to take decision as per the Constitution and its provisions. Ill conceived
definitions of the concepts of "elector/voter"; "right to vote/electoral right" and "election"
have transferred sovereignty from 'voter' to the Political Parties and their leaders. This
implies that at present Political Parties and their leaders are the only sovereign institutions
in India and all others are their slaves.
There are a number of judgments in which the Honb'le Supreme Court of the country has to
state that the Preamble, the Fundamental Rights in Part III and the Directive Principles of State
Policy in Part IV of the Constitution of India, are the part and parcel of the basic feature of the
Constitution and they delineate the socio-economic status of the citizens. Constitutional
amendments against the basic features of the Constitution forced the Hon'ble Supreme Court to
convey to the legislature that though by virtue of Article 368, Parliament is empowred to
amend the Constitution that power cannot be exercised so as to damage the basic features of
the Constitution or to destroy its basic structure. "If you are indeed helpless, say so in an
affidavit. If you are scared to act against these VIP, tell us... Implementation of guidelines for
bungalows should start from top and not from bottom", said that dismayed Bench. "Are they
above the law? If you allow VIPs to carry out illegal constructions, allow judges and common
people to do that as well. You are very fast in acting against a retired judge who made a small
shed in his house while others have constructed entire rooms and have not been touched," the
Bench remarked. (Times News Network, 2007e).
"If after five decades of working, the tale of this largest democracy looks to be that of two
shades of democracy - democracy for the upper 5 percent of the country's population posing
major challenge to the survival of democracy for the 95 percent - it is because a sinister
argument runs the beneath the picture of contrasts" (Panda, 2004) "In more than five decades
of freedom, India is not one India. It is two Indias. One is "We the People of India" that is those
people who are rich, wealthy and powerful and the other category is, "We the Other People of
India" those who are poor, downtrodden, dalits, Harijans, havenots, disadvantaged etc. etc.,
sections of society. Frankly speaking the 4th World within the 3rd World. One may ask why this
has happened even when the present day India has covered a long journey to freedom. It has
happened because, instead of White Britishers we have bred White Indians. The petty Indian,
the havenots, have not only remained invisible to the affluent eye but also feel distanced from
the democratic agenda of the Indian Republic. This has happened not without a reason. In all
these years, though the Britishers have gone, only the masters have changed, in place of
Britishers we have Indian masters. The system remains the same, it has yet to change" (Singh;
Ranbir, 2006).
"In such a democratic framework the people at large have no voice in determining the course of
action the country should follow. During elections the common citizens are used as mere pawns
by the political parties who succeed in winning votes by trickery and muscle flexing" (Panda,
2004). "Inclusion of a caste in the list would mean that it was previously socially advanced and
did not figure among the backward class communities. But with time, their social status
deteriorated and they had to be included in the list. This means more and more castes are
getting backward as there are only inclusions and none being excluded from the list", it said.
Vahanvati said as per the procedure before NCBC, a caste could be excluded from the list only
if someone filed a complaint alleging that a caste had become socially advanced. "No petitions
have been filed seeking exclusion of any caste", he said. The Bench replied, "Merely because
there is no complaint, NCBC cannot abdicate its duty to conduct a periodic reviews of the
social status of castes included in the backward list." Referring to the swelling number of
castes in the backward list, the Bench said, "This means for 60 years, people who were
disadvantaged continue to be backward. If this is so, then what is the meaning of the
arrangements for social advancement of backward community for all these years." (Times News
Network, 2007d).
"Politicians have always exploited religion and subverted it to suit their needs. Perhaps, God
was invented by political scientists of ancient times to control the minds of the masses. All
religions command respect because they stress on non-violence, truth and ethics. A religion
ceases to be religion and loses its sanctity when ethics are subjugated to politics. It is political
leaders who are killing the religion they profess to serve" (Prajan Kumar Jain, 2007). "India's
politicians, whether from Hindutva or secular camp are staunch believers in the idea of a
'Muslim Vote'. It was only natural that they should cast the India- US nuclear deal too in these
terms. The Congress is worried about losing the Muslim vote if it pushes the deal through and is
preparing sops for Muslims to counteract the effect. The left hopes to sway Muslims with its
polemic against the deal" (Editor, 2007a). Let us reproduce the last part of the observation of
Dr. B.R. Ambedkar on this aspect, "The anxiety is deepened by the realisation of the fact that
in addition to our old enemies in the form of castes and creeds, we are going to have many
political parties above their creed or will they place creed above country? I do not know."
"Unfortunately, Bhardwaj is not an exception. Most politicians crawl when the religious
extremists ask them to kneel. They rarely argue; instead they walk the path of appeasement.
The Sangh parivar as well as fundamentalist outfits claiming to represent Muslims, Sikhs and
Christians realised this weakness of our secular system long ago" (Editor, 2007b).
II. DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC:
"Dynastic politics had begun with Sanjay Gandhi's unofficial but powerful position during the
Emergency. Upon her return to power, Indira had personalised Congress as her own family
affair and annointed Sanjay as her successor. There was no doubt as to 'who the next PM would
be if she were to die in office.' As it happend, it was Rajiv and not Sanjay who succeeded. But
even then when he died and Congress leaders offered Sonia Gandhi the Prime Minister post,
she, to her great credit, declined. Here was the chance for Congress to chart a new path. It is
clear that the first priority of Congress is to secure the succession. A beginning has been made
last month by inducting the heir apparent into the mysteries of Congress organisation" (Desai,
2007b).
"Indeed, if truth be told, most parties have virtually become private limited companies, private
'maths' or private armies with their own separate war cheats" (Inderjeet, 2002, page 136 and
137). "What is our culture? No election. Let the leader nominate" (Sangma, 2002, page 17). "It
is the party bosses who decide as to who should contest the election and this tends to deprive
the people of the right to choose those who they believe to be their real representatives"
(Joshi, 2002, page 123). "Good people are staying away from politics thereby giving way to bad
elements to enter" (Sangama, 2002, page 16). "It is said that high quality persons are not
elected to the Lok Sabha any more" (Roy, 2002, page 26). "In our democracy 'birth' and not
'merit' is a major decisive factor in matters of governance" (Agarwal, 2002, page 82). "The
electoral system effectively deny many of those who have the competence to govern an
opportunity to get selected" (Indiresan, 2002, page 37). "Non-participation of the people in
selection of candidates is one of the five issues related to the representational legitimacy"
(Kashyap, 2002, page 1). "The Supreme Court on Monday asked the CBI to complete within six
weeks its probe into allegations about nationality of controversial Assam Congress MP
Manikumar Subba, who reiterated that he is an Indian and not a Nepalese national….. though
there are serious questions about Subba's nationality. CBI has not questioned him about his
place of birth or place of schooling. Yet, it says that it is unable to comment whether he is an
Indian national. "What kind of inquiry is being conducted by CBI, it had said" (Times News
Network, 2007a). "In this context, I would like to add that dynasties get promoted more in
civilian ruled countries. Most South Asian countries, especially India, have experienced dynastic
rule while ostensibly being a republic" (Mita Ghose, 2007).
III. CONCLUSION:
On completion of fifty years of the working of the Constitution, it was considered appropriate
to take stock of it's successes and failures. On 23rd February, 2000, the President of India, Sri
K.R. Narayanan appointed the National Commission to Review the working of the Constitution.
One of the observations of NCRWC is, "right to vote" under universal adult franchise gives to
every citizen, an opportunity to participate in the democratic process and to select the
government. A full recognition to our democratic rights and responsibilities, as citizens, at
election time will automatically rid the system of corruption, criminalisation, money and
muscle power and the like ills" (Kashyap, 2006). Can the existing unbreakable Vicious Circle of
Constitutional Democratic Republic ensure democratic rights to every voter of the country; i.e.
equal opportunity-liberty-right to contest election and to cast his/her vote in favour of the
candidate nominated by himself/herself only? Can the reforms suggested and recommended by
NCRWC, if implemented in absolute sense, and the efforts being put by the reformers and the
social activists to change the existing system of governance, make the required change in the
existing combination of undemocratic institutional structure of governance and undemocratic
procedure for election? If not, then for solving all the problems prevailing in India
simultaneously, the reformers and the social activists must put efforts for replacing the
existing undemocratic combination with the democratic combination of "partyless six-tier
decentralised bottom-to-top institutional structure of governance…. constituted… as per the
'Rule of Maximum Vote'…. operated…. by the voters of the country and their nominees.
As regards the 'law of land' and 'rule of law', when the law (Article 329 of the Constitution and
Section 80 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951) is based on the ill conceived
definitions of the concepts of "voter"; "right to vote" and "election" then it becomes impossible
for 'single voter' to fight theoretically, legislatively and behaviouraly for his/her democratic
right, i.e., equal opportunity-liberty-right to contest election and to cast his/her vote in favour
of the candidate nominated by himself/herself only. Realisation of democratic rights demands
a nationwide Revolutionary Democratic Movement. For initiating and running Revolutionary
Democratic Movement in the country successfully it was/is necessary: (i) to define the concepts
of "voter", "right to vote" and "election" on the basis of their inherent essence and spirit; (ii) to
devise multi-tier decentralised bottom-to-top institutional structure of governance and 'Rule of
Maximum Vote' based procedure for election ensuring availability of every participating voter
of the constituency/electoral college for getting his/her thoughts-expressions- actions
evaluated by every participating voter of the constituency/electoral college on the basic of
day-to-day interaction; and (iii) to pinpoint theoretical; legislative and behavioural aspects for
mobilising electronic and printed media and also mental and physical support of over seventy
crore voters of the country for demolishing the unbreakable Vicious Circle of Constitutional
Democratic Republic. The first chapter of the book fulfils the first two requirements of the
Revolutionary Democratic Movement. The following lines explain the theoretical, legislative
and beahvioural aspects for challenging the constitutors-operators-amenders of the
unbreakable Vicious Circle of Constitutional Democratic Republic.
A. Theoretical:
Democratic Republic without democratic rights is a very serious fraud and very dangerous
legislative conspiracy which had been done and is being done by the legislators of independent
India against innocent voters of the country. Fractured verdicts, being given by the Indian
voters since last twenty-five years against the governance of so-called ideology based party
system, have destroyed theoretical, legislative and behavioural base of the ideology based
party system completely. Ideology based party system has lost every and all the rights to
govern Indian citizens. The very essence and spirit of the judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court
of the country (Before Y.K. Sabharwal, C.J. and K.G. Balkrishnan, B.N. Agrawal, Ashok Bhan
and Arijit Pasayat JJ) in case of Remeshwar Prasad and Others v. Union of India and Another
(2006) 2 SCC indirectly confirms the constitutional invalidity of the ideology based party
system. In a way, the Political Parties and their leaders are being addicted of "three monkeys"
dictum of Bapujee. Keeping their constitutionally invalid and illegal possession on governance,
the Political Parties and their leaders have adopted the idea of "coalition government" without
taking any approval either of the Constitution or of the voters of the country. Coalition
government is undemocratic; against the ideology based party system; unethical and
unconstitutional. In this situation, initiation of a non-violent nation-wide Revolutionary
Democratic Movement for getting democratic rights i.e., "equal opportunity-liberty-right 'to
contest election" and "to cast his/her vote in favour of the candidate nominated by
himself/herself only to every voter of the country" is the only option left with the citizens of
this great nation.
B. Legislative:
Through Public Interest Litigations (PILs), the reformers and the social activists must challenge
the ill conceived definitions of the concepts of 'elector'; 'right to vote' and 'election'. Through
PILs all the three organs of the State - through Judiciary against the Parliament (the
legislature) and the Election Commission (the executive) can be covered. "The Constitution has
vested the Supreme Court with the power to impose correctives on the executive and in lesser
measure, on the legislature. The more the power, the greater the responsibility that goes with
it" (Krishna Iyer, 2007).
C. Behavioural:
Availability of a commonly agreeable issue alongwith active and effective continuous
involvement of the electronic and printed media, are the two main pre-requisites for initiating
and running a non-violent nation wide Revolutionary Democratic Movement successfully. "Equal
opportunity-liberty-right to contest election" seems to be the most agreeable issue. The
ordinary citizens of the country can attract the electronic and printed media by creating
legitimate crisis in the management of the existing procedure for election. Submission of more
than two thousand valid nomination papers from one and the same constituency in the coming
election either of Lok Sabha or of any State Assembly can certainly make the conduct of
election in the concerned constituency impractical and, hence, impossible. This would help in
mobilising electronic and printing media and also over seventy crore voters of the country
mentally and physically for initiating and running the required non-violent national-wide
Revolutionary Democratic Movement successfully for realising their democratic rights.
Inclusive development without inclusive democracy is a dream dreamt by the Politicians.
Inclusive democracy demands absolute and unconditional political equality up to the political
status of contesting candidate and evolution of multi-tier institutional structure of governance
and procedure for election accordingly. The first chapter presents the evolved multi-tier
institutional structure of governance and procedure for election. All the reformers and the
social activists working individually and separately must join hands for challenging the
constitutors-operators-amenders of the existing unbreakable Vicious Circle of Constitutional
Democratic Republic theoretically, legislatively and behaviourally.
REFERENCES

Agarwal, U.C.; Indiresan, P.V.; Inderjeet; Joshi, Keerat.; Kashyap, Subhash, C.;
Muthamma, C.B.; Patel, Himmat Bhai and Patel, Shanti Bhai.; Patil, Shivraj.; Roy,
Sugata.; Sahabbuddin, Syed.; Sahai, Suprabha, V.; Sahasrabudhe, Vinay.; Sharda, Prem
Kumar.; Sangma, P.A.. The papers of all these authors without titles have been
included in the book, "National Surgence Through Election Reforms", edited by Dr.
Subhash C. Kashyap and published by Shipra Publications, Delhi-110092.

Ahmad, Faizan (2007), "Fear Grips Politicians Facing Trial" in The Times of India,
October 5, page 6.

Alam, Javeed (1999), "What is Happening Inside Indian Democracy" in Economic and
Political Weekly, 34(37), Bombay, September 11.

Annoussamy, David (2005), "Election 2004- Did Democracy Advance?" in South Asia
Politics, Vol.3, Issue 9, New Delhi, page 24.

Bains, Hardial (2007), "The Last Reform: Breaking with the Past" in Ghadar Jari Hai,
Vol. I, No.1, New Delhi, page 17-20.

Basu, Durga Das (2007), "Case Book on Indian Constitutional Law", Kamal Law House,
Kolkata, page 4-5.

Bhandari, Prakash (2007), "Unruly Scenes rock Rajasthan House: Ruling BJP, Opposition
Congress MLAs Indulge in Scuffle" in The Times of India, New Delhi, September 20, page
5.

Chatterjee, Somnath (2007), "LS Speaker favours Recall of MPs To Check House
Disruptions" in The Times of India, New Delhi, September 21, page 11.

2 Chaudhari, Arindam (2007) "To make India Democratic and Politics De-criminalised:
Allow Election Voting through SMS in the Times of India, New Delhi, October 29, page
23.

Chhokar, Jagdeep S. (2006), "Getting Electoral Reforms Implemented: Moving from
Discussion to Action" in Constitution of India: Review and Reassessment, edited by Dr.
Subhash C. Kashyap, Universal Law Publishing Co., Delhi-110033, page 102-108.

Desai, Meghnad (2007a), "Let's Move on : Politics has Lost Touch with New India" in the
Times of India, New Delhi, September 28, page 14.

Desai, Meghnad (2007b), "It's a Family Affair: Indian Parties Hobbled by Dynastic
Politics" in The Times of India, New Delhi, October, page 14.

Deshpande Rajeev and Mohan, Vishwa (2007), "Politics comes in the way of terror
probes" in The Times of India, New Delhi, September 4, page 1.

Dr. B.R. Ambedkar quoted by Maheshwari, S.R. (2006), "Good Governance: Issues and
Challenges in India" in Constitution of India: Review and Reassessment, edited by Dr.
Subhash C. Kashyap, Universal Law Publishing Co., Delhi-110033, page 138-146.

Dr. Rajendra Prasad, quoted by J.S. Verma (2006), "Follow Up To NCRWC
Recommendations" in Constitution of India: Review and Reassessment, edited by Dr.
Subhash C. Kashyap, Universal Law Publishing Co., Delhi-110033, page 33-38.

Dubhashi, P.R. (2006), "India's Political Parties-Need for Code of Conduct" in
Constitution of India: Review and Reassessment, edited by Dr. Subhjash C. Kashyap,
Universal Law Published Co., Delhi-110063, page 81-89.

Durga, Kanaka P. (2007), "Police personnel are treated like slaves" in The Times of
India, New Delhi, September 24, page 14.

Dutt, R.P. (1947), "India Today" People Publishing House, Bombay, page 503-521.

Dutta, Bhaskar (2007), "Unstable Coalitions Hurt" in The Times of India, New Delhi
September 7, page 14.

Editor (2006), "Urban Plight: Poor Governance, Decaying Institutions Suffocate Cities" in
The Times of India, New Delhi, September 22, page 14.

Editor (2007a), "That Muslim Vote" in The Times of India, New Delhi September 12,
page 14.

Editor (2007b), "Myth and Reality: India is a secular state Law Minister should
remember" in The Times of India, New Delhi, September 16, page 14.

Editor (2007c), "Clean Up Your Act: Sacking of UP Cops Points to Crisis of Governance"
in The Times of India, New Delhi, September 17, page 14.

Editor (2007d), "Get Them Out-SC asks the government': to oust VIP squatters", in The
Times of India, New Delhi, September 21, page 14.

Gangrade, K.D. (1985), "Plan: People's Involvement" in The Hindustan Times, New
Delhi, June 11.

Ghosh, Avijit (2007), "Hours Wasted Half of Monsoon Session - LS Lost 42 Hours Due to
Interruptions, Four Bills Were Passed Without Any Debate" in The Times of India, New
Delhi, September 14, page 10.

Gopa, Pramanik and Basu, Tapati (2003), "Democracy and Human Rights" paper
presented at XXVII Indian Social Science Congress, December 3 to 7, organized by
Indian Academy of Social Sciences and IIT, Kharagpur.

Henry George quoted by Singh, Ranbir (2006), "Fundamental Rights- An Audit in the
New Millennium" in Constitution of India: Review and Reassessment, edited by Dr.
Subhash C. Kashyap, Universal Law Publishing Co., Delhi-110033, page 54-61.

Indiresan, P.V. (2006), "Electoral Reforms: Representational Legitimacy" in Constitution
of India: Review and Reassessment, edited by Dr. Subhash C. Kashyap, Universal Law
Publishing Co., Delhi-110033, page 90-97.

Jain, Mahen (2007), "Politicians should change their priorities" in The Times of India,
New Delhi, September 22, page 14.

Jaffrelot, Chrislophe (2007), "What BJP Rule Meant" in The Times of India, New Delhi,
August 21, page 12.

Jalan, Bimal (2007) "Make the Govt. Work" in The Times of India, New Delhi, October
29, page 14.

Jha, Nandkumar (2007), "Judiciary should punish wrong doers" in The Times of India,
New Delhi, September 6, page 10.

Jhunjhunwala, Bharat (2006), "Making Democracy Work" in Constitution of India:
Review and Reassessment, edited by Dr. Subhash C. Kashyap, Universal Law Publishing
Co. Pvt. Ltd., Delhi-110033, page 148-154.

Jug Suraiya (2007a), "No Minister: Don't Speech, Just Listen" in The Times of India, New
Delhi, August 18, page 7.

Jug Suraiya (2007b), "We are our own worst terrorists" in The Times of India, New
Delhi, August 29, page 8.

Jug Suraiya (2007c), "In truth, we need a 'contempt of people law" in The Times of
India, New Delhi, September 25, page 10.

Karl Marx, quoted by Satyanarayan, Y.V. (2004), "Marx and Gandhi's Vision of Indian
Society" in Bhartiya Samajik Chintan, Vol. II, No.4, Kolkata, page 58-67.

Kashyap, Subhash C. (2006), "Working of the Constitution: Review and Reassessment" in
Constitution of India: Review and Reassessment, edited by Dr. Subhash C. Kashyap,
Universal Law Publishing Co., Delhi-110033, page3-32.

Kirshna, Iyer, V.R. (2007), "Sabharwal on trial" in The Times of India, New Delhi,
September 13, page 12.

Mack, Andrew (2002), "Human Security in the New Millennium" in Work in Progress: A
Review of Research Activities of the United Nations University, Vol. 16, No.2, Summer
2002, Tokyo, page 4-5.

Mahapatra, Dhanajay (2007), "Has CBI lost it's independent tag?" in The Times of India,
New Delhi, September 11, page 8.

Maheshwari, S.R. (2006), "Good Governance: Issues and Challenges in India" in
Constitution of India: Review and Reassessment, edited by Dr. Subhash C. Kashyap,
Universal Law Publishing Co., Delhi-110033, page 138-147.

Marwah, Ved (2006), "Development and Good Governance Issues" in Constitution of
India: Review and Reassessment, edited by Dr. Subhash C. Kashyap, Universal Law
Publishing Co., Delhi-110033, page 111-114.

Mehta, Jagat S. (2006), "Asserting Civic Sovereignty and Civil Service Neutrality" in
Constitution of India: Review and Reassessment, edited by Dr. Subhash C. Kashyap,
Universal Law Publishing Co., Delhi-110033, page 115-125.

Merchant, A.K. (2006), "Parliamentary Reforms: A Baha'I View point, in Constitution of
India: Review and Reassessment, edited by Dr. Subhash C. Kashyap, Universal Law
Publishing Co., Delhi-110033, page 74-78.

Mita Ghose (2007), "Civilian Politicians Promote Dynasties" in The Times of India, New
Delhi, October 4, page 10.

Mukhia, Harbansh (2006), "Understanding Terrorism- A response to failings of liberal
democracy" in The Times of India, New Delhi. July 24, page 14.

Ojha, Sanjay (2007), "Now Maois's Zoom Around in SUVs" in The Times of India, New
Delhi, September 17, page 10.

Panda, Debabrata (2004), "Editorial, An Elusive Ideal" in Bhartiya Samajik Chintan,
Vol.II, No.4, Kolkata, page 3.

Pappu, Shyamala (2006), "Whiter Electoral Reforms?" in Constitution of India: Review
and Reassessment, edited by Dr. Subhash C. Kashyap, Universal Law Publishing Co.,
Delhi-110033, page 98-101.

Parliament Committee quoted by Sivaramakrishnan, K.C. (2006), "Decentralisation and
the Outcomes of the NCRWC Recommendations" in Constitution of India: Review and
Reassessment, edited by Dr. Subhash C. Kashyap. Universal Law Publishing Co., Delhi110033. page 157-165.

Parthasarthy, G. (2003), "Challenges to Democracy in India" paper presented at XXVII
Indian Social Science Congress" December 3 to 7, 2003 organized by Indian Academy of
Social Sciences and IIT Kharagpur.

Pathak, Bindeshwar (2006), "Fundamental Values and Constitutional Reforms" in
Constitution of India: Review and Reassessment, edited by Dr. Subhash C. Kashyap,
Universal Law Publishing Co., Delhi-110033, page 45-53.

Pinto, William Shrithadi (2004), "Human Rights and Democracy: The Indian Experience"
in Bhartiya Samajik Chintan, Vol.II, No.4, Kolkata page 39-46.

Parjan Kumar Jain (2007), "Political leaders subvert religion for their own ends" in The
Times of India, October 13, page 14.

Raghavan S. (2007), Editorial, "Call of the Times" in Ghadar Jar Hai Vol.1, No.1, New
Delhi, page-1 & 6.

Raghavan, Sreenivas, T.S. (2007), "DMK Shuts down TN', SC fumes" in The Times of
India, New Delhi, October 2, page 1.

Raj, A.S. (2007), "What we need is a benevolent dictator" in The Times of India, New
Delhi, September 14, page 12.

Sathe, Vasant (2006), "Fundamental of the Constitution and Parliament Reforms" in
Constitution of India: Review and Reassessment, edited by Dr. Subhash C. Kashyap,
Universal Law Publishing Co., Delhi-110033, page 65-73.

Satyanarayana, Y.V. (2004), "Marx and Gandhi's Vision of Ideal Society" in Bhartiya
Samajik Chintan, Volume-II, No.4, Kolkata, page 58-67.

Sau, Ranjit (2002), "Crash of Civilizations: Let Billion Voices Rise" in Economic and
Political Weekly, 37(31), Bombay, August 2.

Sau, Ranjit (2004), "Conditions of Democracy in India" in Bharatiya Samajik Chintan"
Vol. II, No.4, Kolkata, page 4-19.

Sen, Suhit (2007), "Congress Loses the Plot: Ram Affidavit Issue shows up the Party's
Opportunism" in The Times of India, New Delhi, September 18, page 12.

Shahabuddin, Syed (2005), "Rule of Law in Time of Oppression and Terrorism" in South
Asia Politics, Volume-3, Issue-9, New Delhi, page-7-9.

Sharma, D.K. (2007), "Left, BJP's Commitment to India is Questionable" in The Times of
India, New Delhi, August 20, page 14.

Sharma, S.K. (2006), "Union, State and Local Relations: Delineation of Functions and
Accountability" in Constitution of India: Review and Reassessment, edited by Dr.
Subhash C. Kashyap, Universal Law Publishing Co., Delhi-110033, page 182-187.

Singh, Kumar, Akhilesh (2007), "After Cops, tech colleges on Maya's radar" in The Times
of India, New Delhi, September 20, page 4.

Singh, Ranbir (2006), "Fundamental Rights: An Audit in the New Millennium" in
Constitution of India: Review and Reassessment, edited by Dr. Subhash C. Kashyap,
Universal Law Publishing Co., Delhi-110033, page 54-61.

Sivaramakrishnan K.C.(2006) "Decentralisation and the Outcome of the NCRWC
Recommendations" in Constitution of India: Review and Reassessment, edited by Dr.
Subhash C. Kashyap, Universal Law Publishing Co., Delhi-110033, page 157-165.

Swaminathan, S. and Aiyar Anklesaria (2006a), "Terrorists as Vote Banks" in The Times
of India, New Delhi, July 30, page 14.

Swaminathan, S. and Aiyar Anklesaria (2006b), "Govt. failure private sector rescue" in
The Times of India, New Delhi, July 30, page 17.

Times Insight Group (2007), "Honesty Before Efficiency: TOI Leadership Poll" in The
Times of India, New Delhi, August 17, page 1.

Times News Network (2006), "Panchayat Seats: Surest Way to Get Rich" in The Times of
India, New Delhi, May 20, page 10.

Times News Network (2007a), "SC: How much longer to prove Subba Nationality" in The
Times of India, New Delhi, September 12, page 13.

Times News Network (2007b), "SC: Can't Order a Floor Test in Assembly, says Goa
Govt." in The Times of India, New Delhi, August 19, page 7.

Times News Network (2007c), "Karnataka Not Far Away From Bihar Like Situation" in
The Times of India, New Delhi, September 27, page 8.

Times News Network (2007d), "Why is backward class list Growing: SC" in The Times of
India, New Delhi, September 27, page 8.

Times News Network (2007e), "HC: Are residents of LBZ above law?" in The Times of
India, New Delhi, October 12, page 8.

Verma, J.S. (2006), "Follow Up To NCRWC Recommendations" in Constitution of India:
Review and Reassessment, edited by Dr. Subhash C. Kashyap, Universal Law Publishing
Co., Delhi-110033, page 33-38.

Yerankar, S.K. (2003), "Erosion of Parliamentary Democracy in India" paper presented
at XXVII Indian Social Science Congress" December 3 to 7, 2003 organized by Indian
Academy of Social Sciences and IIT Kharagpur.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Dr. Jagpal Singh was born in the village Prai, district Muzaffarnagar, Uttar Pradesh in the year
1943. He was a Research Scholar and Technical Assistant at University of Roorkee, U.P. In 1979,
he joined the Indian Institute of Technology, New Delhi as Senior Research Assistant and later
rose to Principal Scientific Officer where he remained till his voluntary retirement in 1999. His
life is now dedicated to the initiation of a mass movement in the country for ensuring political
equality upto the level of contesting candidate, in the true spirit of a patriot.
His contributions to society are noteworthy. Over the years he published sixty research papers
in national and international Journals, supervised seven Ph.D. Scholars, eleven Major Projects
related to M.Sc./M.Tech Degree, and published three books and three booklets on the New
Politico Economic Philosophy. Among his many achievements he evolved concepts: Physical
Quality of Human Resource for (i) defining the concepts of development; economic
equality/inequality; poverty and employment/ unemployment; (ii) designing Pricing and
Resource Allocation Mechanisms free from market forces; (iii) regulating Policies and
Programmes related to (a) Monetary Policy; (b) Human Resource Development; (c) Fiscal
System; (d) Research and Development; Production-Training-Service Centre for ensuring direct
and indirect participation of local society in (a) Preparing Development Plan under the Macro
Frame for their area; (b) Executing and Monitoring the development plan and Sharing the
benefits; (c) Building and Operating the structures of governance, administration and
production; (d) Maintaining balance between supply of and demand for national currency and
workforce at local level; balance of trade at regional level and balance of payment at national
level and Multi-tier Institutional Structure of Governance and Procedure for Election for
implementing Partyless Democracy.
"What this means is that one of the major problems in the world is the breakdown of the
system of governance, be it a democratic form or any other form. If the democratic form is
the most popular one in the world today, it is very difficult to find countries where it is not
under serious strain."
—A.K. Merchant
"The creation of something new is not accomplished by the intellect but by the play instinct
acting from inner necessity. The creative mind plays with the objects it loves."
—CARL JUNG
"Inclusive development without inclusive democracy is a dream dreamt by the politicians.
Inclusive democracy demands absolute and unconditional political equality up to the political
status of contesting candidate and evolution of multi-tier institutional structure of
governance and procedure for election accordingly."
—JAG PAL SINGH
"All that is necessary for triumph of evil is that good men do nothing."
—EDMUND BURKE
"In strategic parlance, Gandhiji used non-violence when he was seeking to change the status
quo and the adversary was defending it. The apartheid regime in South Africa and the British
empire in India were trying to defend the status quo, Gandhiji challenged it through nonviolent, massive disobedience."
—K. SUBRAMANYAM