Kr Swarn Kishore Singh
A political writer has rightly said while addressing average Governments;
“The Government tends to regard the opposition as a brake on a car going uphill whereas the opposition thinks the car is going downhill”.
Parliament is a place where one side proposes something and other side examines it, grills the proposal by free debates and then both the sides converge at certain point of agreement after passing through the crucible of discussions, arguments and rebuttals etc. A system in which the activity of politics is devalued is detrimental to Parliamentary democracy. Parliaments are basically supposed to indulge in debates to set a narrative and to effectuate transaction of people’s business in public. And when there is a debate there is an obvious opposition to a particular narrative. And right to dissent within limits of a particular frame is an attribute of a civilized society. Infact reading of history confirms that freedom dies when criticism ends. A genuine political opposition is a sine qua non for a democratic set up and to help the public masses to zero in on a narrative while approaching an issue of national significance. The rights and respect of political opposition are not for their respective convenience but for felicitating the democratic values specifically and freedom generally. Since in absence of opposition, politics ceases to exist and solely administration takes over which in most of the cases turn ruthless and can be addressed in one word i.e. dictatorship.
The division between government and opposition is as old as political democracy itself. With the formation of Government, an entity called opposition takes birth by default. Government is a body which could alternate among different group of citizens and that group in modern times are known as political parties. In our times, where there is so big a volume of population, direct democracy can only be dreamt of; hence a system of representative system providing for periodic elections is viable. In elections one group gets the nod of the public to sit in Government by way of attaining majority in the Parliament and other group sits in opposition to put a check on the tyranny of the elected. The opposition should act in such a manner in parliament to convince the masses of the country that it could be an improvement on the Government of day and could have had dealt with the issue in a better manner. And it is not hard to agree that a system works best only when there is a change in guard of Government at reasonable intervals.
But unfortunately we have seen the power of Government is used to demolish the opponents and hence wreck the opposition. I remember in March 2013, during the regime of UPA, within hours of withdrawal of support from UPA by Karunanidhi’s party DMK, CBI conducted simultaneous raids at eighteen establishments and houses owned by Stalin and Alagiri, both sons of Karunanidhi. Another example of political vendetta was seen when the then chief minister of Gujarat and present Prime Minister of India, Narendra Modi was grilled continuously for 5 hours by CBI on behest of certain political overlords in New Delhi. And to escape the wrath, Mulayam Singh gives support to anyone who gets anointed at 7, Racecourse road, just because the guy there has got the keys to the cage in which the parrot called CBI is kept.
In fact after regime of Jawahar Lal Nehru & Lal Bahadur Shastri, the sense of mutual respect between ruling and opposition parties has been perpetually demolished by successive Governments. To begin with Indira Gandhi started demeaning the political opposition present in the country and it went so far that she jailed her political opponents during the infamous emergency period. Then in 1979, Charan Singh hatched conspiracy in connivance with congress to topple Morarji Desai. After that in 1990, Congress again repeated what they had done a decade ago; in collusion with Chander Shekhar they dethroned Vishwa Nath Pratap Singh. In the decade of 90’s again Sonia led Congress colluded with Jayalalitha’s AIADMK to pull down Atal ji’s Government. Only ray of hope was seen during the regime of Narsimha Rao, who had sent Atal ji, the then leader of opposition to lead the Indian delegation to Human Rights Commission at Geneva in 1993.
It is not that only Government should respect opposition and its point of view but the opposition too should remember one thing that it is the ruling party which voices the majority of the country. And hence its stand should not be opposed just for sake of opposition. In a country like India, where there is multi-party system, a party which is voted by atleast 35% of the electorate gets majority in the Lok Sabha, the job of opposition becomes even more significant. The opposition parties have the responsibility to be the voice of the remaining divided and scattered 65% junta.
Actually the real problem lies in the sort of idleness the opposition parties are experiencing in India. They are taking the words of George Tierney, a British politician and minister, too seriously who had said that “the duty of opposition is very simple; to oppose everything and propose nothing”. This perspective of George Tierney was taken a step ahead when Shashi Tharoor criticized hanging of Afzal Guru and called it wrong during elections of Jammu & Kashmir. And the irony is that Afzal Guru was hanged during the regime of UPA. Even Shashi Tharoor was part of the Government as MoS, which took the decision of secret execution of terrorist, Afzal Guru. Now Rahul Gandhi has supported the secessionist forces in JNU only because both congress and those elements in JNU have had a common opponent to corner i.e. BJP, thence justifying slogans like “Bharat ki Barbadi tak Jung rahegi”, “Chheen ke lenge aazadi” & the worst “Afzal hum Sharminda hain, tere qatil zinda hain”. This was not even ethically wrong but even politically I will call it a blunder. I will go to the extent of saying that this abrupt activism of Congress and other parties which are sitting in opposition is just to find an excuse to further stall the parliament in the coming budget session. The opposition parties should realise one thing that the working of Parliament has not only to do with BJP but with the people of India and their welfare. The opposition should understand this thing and should abstain from stalling the Parliament. They should indulge and involve in the proceedings and debates instead and keep on cautioning the ruling party against insouciance of the ruling class. In a way, I would call the opposition parties are real conscience keepers of a nation. But in no case the stage of Parliament should be used to settle scores; be it personal or political. But lately the political ideologies have taken a back seat and now only opposition stalls Parliament to clear the accounts.
The opposition cannot and should not oppose without reason. It should come up with alternative policies which should be responsible and practicable. I would rather propose installation of a shadow cabinet as is working in United Kingdom, Australia, Canada and many other countries. The shadow cabinet is a group of members of opposition parties, who under the leadership of leader of opposition form an alternative cabinet to the Government of the day. Each member of the shadow cabinet shadows or marks each individual member of the real cabinet. The shadow cabinet is duty bound to offer an alternative program policy or scheme if they criticise the policy of the Government. In such a system the opposition becomes more responsible and simultaneously new leaders are groomed for future responsibilities. And when those opposition leaders form the Government and they are bestowed with the responsibilities of forming policies, they are not naïve to system. Infact members of shadow cabinet are preferably appointed to the cabinet post when their party gets into the Government.
It is pretty obvious for Government to find opposition very irritating and disdaining. And the longer a particular party is in Government, its members are almost convinced that they are part of the divine power and governing others is their birth-right. They believe that their decisions are unerring and flawless. Therefore the role of opposition in such a situation is to remain vigilant against oppression and callous invasion of the Government over the rights of the people. But only a strong but responsible opposition can rein the ruthlessness and bigotry of the elected.
Parliament is supposed to be a custodian of freedom and its proceeding should be emblem of mannerism. But unfortunately very recently we have seen a lot of things in Parliament and state assemblies which are unparliamentary in sight and uncivil in nature. To this I will end up saying that though procedures should change with changing times but the concept and traditions of Parliament and its components are timeless and should be immune to any change. Parliament will remain guardian of our freedom and that of our free institutions, only if opposition is fully aware of the responsibilities and effectively discharging them as well. Now as we are approaching the budget session, let’s hope the opposition fulfils the desiderata and asks some intelligent questions and puts some strong arguments. Alongwith that the opposition should refrain from sheer calumniation as it is purely nugatory and solves no real purpose but infact decimates the whole purpose of holding a Parliamentary session. We are fed up with the nimiety of pugnacity in the Parliament; now let the real game begin and opposition should not only behave like a competitor but a referee too.
(The author is an advocate in Supreme Court of India and a political and legal analyst)
feedbackexcelsior@gmail.com
Follow our WhatsApp channel