We need a National Sarpanch
Economic Times, September 25,
2013
|
Archive
|
|
|
|
By Pradeep S Mehta
This week's "Poke Me", invites
your comments on why we need a National Sarpanch. The
feature will be reproduced on the edit page of the Saturday
edition of the newspaper with a pick of readers' best
comments.So be poked and fire in your comments to us right
away. Comments reproduced in the paper will be the ones that
support or oppose the views expressed here intelligently.
Feel free to add reference links etc., in support of your
comments
A recent poll among over 5,000
young people on who would make a good prime minister, more
than half suggested a presidential form of government.
Surely, this must have emanated from the sad experiences of
horse trading in Parliament over policy debates, including
whimsical partners walking out and walking in. This
reinforces the point that the Westminster model of democracy
is unsuitable for a stable government in India.
It is not only the coalition system but the concomitant pork
barrel politics, when the ruling alliance is in minority,
that increases uncertainty and impacts national interest and
growth. Faced with a similar situation,Sri Lanka moved from
a Westminster model to a French-style semi-presidential
system in 1978. Our village sarpanches (headmen) are elected
directly by the whole village and not by the elected ward
panches (councillors). Not only that, in many cities, even
mayors are now being directly elected by the whole
electorate and not the elected ward councillors. Both
sarpanches and mayors are accountable to the council and do
not have unfettered powers, but they are stable and not
dependent upon a ragtag coalition to function effectively.
This system has been brought in after much experience. If we
can bring about the change at the local level, why not at
the national and sub-national levels?
Many have argued that we need to think of replacing the
Westminster model with an alternate system. In the German
system, the parliament has a fixed term of four years and a
'no confidence' motion has to be accompanied by a 'for
confidence' motion. This means that even strange bedfellows
have to run the government together. During 2005-09, the
conservative Christian Democrats ruled in a coalition with
their opponents: Social Democrats and Greens.
Our own polity is not so mature that one can imagine a
coalition government of Congress and BJP, who together could
easily command a majority without any help from minor
parties with their own parochial agenda. Other than the
stable parliamentary system, the German electoral system too
is unique. Half the seats in the parliament are directly
elected and another half is indirectly elected on the basis
of votes garnered by the parties contesting elections. For
all such nominated seats, parties usually select competent
people. For any party to get indirect seats in parliament,
it needs at least 5% of the total votes cast in a national
election. This then prevents smaller parties from coming
into the parliament.
Sri Lanka has also introduced the List system on
proportional representation, with a cut-off point of 5%, to
replace the first-past-the-post system of India. This
ensures an accurate reflection of overall voter preference
in parliament and assures a stable government. The objective
was to eliminate smaller parties from parliament so that a
few major parties could populate the house.
The change also limited the term
of the president to two terms of six years each, as
prevailing in many countries. Alas, in 2010, this was
amended to allow a person to be elected president as long as
s/he could muster the votes. This was a retrogressive
measure. The Sri Lankan system, like the French one, has a
directly elected President and a Prime Minister elected by
the parliament, who then appoints a cabinet. The Sri Lankan
president is quite powerful and is able to function without
the support of parliament. The US presidential system is
different: the President is directly elected, while both the
lower and upper houses are also elected by the people.
While the US president has most
powers, including appointing his own cabinet from outside
parliament, the US Congress has powers to keep a check on
the president through budget controls and a parliamentary
committee system. This not only approves all political
appointments, but debates policy issues publicly. The
semi-presidential form of government in France also enjoys
great democratic stability mainly because of the inherent
powerful check against the president's power through an
accountability mechanism, namely the inability of the
president to dismiss the prime minister. This forces the
president to rely on democratic processes, such as
compromise and coalition building, to resolve political
conflicts and reach a consensus.
To avoid any incidence of autocratic rule by the president a
limit on the tenure can also be adopted. South Korea shifted
from a presidential form of government to a
semi-presidential form of government in 1987 with a directly
elected president as the executive head of the government,
in order to keep a check on a very strong president. It
allows only a single five year term for a president. Thus it
brings in fresh blood every five years, rather than limiting
it to a person who could become an autocrat. Hence, it
appears that the semi-presidential form of government
instead of a pure form of presidential government maintains
a fine balance between a strong president and a strong
legislature, both keeping checks on each other.
Following the French system of government, a directly
elected president with well-defined powers is the need of
the hour. The elected person will not be easily influenced
by the legislature, headed by a prime minister. This
resembles our system in India, except for reversing the
balance of power between the president and the council of
ministers. A directly elected and strong president will not
be vulnerable to coalitions. It will have stability of
tenure, and will be able to concentrate on governance, than
just on staying in government.
The author is Secretary
General, CUTS International. Tanushree Bhatnagar of CUTS
contributed to this article
This news can
also be viewed at: http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/
|
|
Archive
|
|
|
|
See Also
Media Room
Rich in Numbers, Poor in Policy
Economic Times, July 18, 2011
Curb exploitative banks, BoZ urged
Zambia Daily mail, July 12, 2011
Banks have sabotaged local economy - CUTS
The Post Online, July 12, 201
Approach paper for 12th Plan by month-end
Finance Buzz, July
12, 2011
World leans towards more regulation
Business Line, July
12, 2011
Economic growth a must for poverty reduction: Montek
News One, July 11, 2011
No
move to restrict FDI in pharmaceutical: Montek Singh
Ahluwalia
The Economic Times, July
11, 2011
Events
Harsha V. Singh to launch CUTS International publication
July 19, 2011
Programme
Training Programme on Technology Diplomacy
July 11-15, 2011, Jaipur
2nd CUTS Thought
Leadership Lecture on
Public Information Infrastructure and Innovations
July 09,
2011, Jaipur
|
Agenda |
Report |
Cost of Economic Non-Cooperation to Consumers
in South Asia
Project Review Meeting
June 28, 2011, Dhaka, Bangladesh
Backgrounder and Agenda
Regional Meeting
Climate Change and Food Security in South Asia
June
27, 2011, Dhaka, Bangladesh
Backgrounder Note and Agenda
Archive |