Unlike numerous other protests that we see in India, the one spearheaded by Anna is not merely raising a regional issue like Gujjar, Telangana, Amarnath Yatra land allotment or even Bhatta Parsole land dispute or Adarsh in Mumbai but one on widespread corruption that has found resonance across the country and across all classes which means that it threatens the status quo and questions the legitimacy of our governing classes. No doubt the UPA has been democratically elected and has every right to continue to rule the country so long as it enjoys a majority in parliament. What the civil society activists are asking is to include their version of the Lokpal Bill for consideration of the parliamentary select committee. Why is the government scared of including it even for consideration is not understood unless it thinks that its mere inclusion would raise uncomfortable issues that will shake the very foundations of our democracy. The simple question is: What does an average citizen do if she or he is unhappy with the way the government is addressing her/his legitimate grievances? How can the government insist that all those who want to protest must first become members of the parliament? Does this mean that an average citizen cannot raise his or her voice against the ruling coalition? Yes, tomorrow, the UPA may arrest all these people for breaking the law but would that resolve the issue? The judiciary will in all probability strike down the government ruling and the civil society activists would once again be free to start their agitation. Would some one explain?
2 comments:
India has a 1.2 billion population and so its 0.001% section can arrogate itself to represent the entire civil society
Mr Rajan, just becuse it is so small, should that 0.001% keep quite? It is not representing the entire nation, just itself. It is asking questions and in a democracy it has the right to do so!! That what is supposed to keep the system in check.
Post a Comment