VERDICT 2004- Civil Society and Democratization in by Dr. Yaaminey Mubayi Kontakt: [email protected]

Dr. Yaaminey Mubayi has specialised in political history and development from the Jawaharlal Nehru University, Delhi and the London School of Economics, UK. She is an independent consultant based in New Delhi and writes frequently on issues of governance and development in South Asia.

Elections 2004 in India, the world’s largest democracy, can be said to mark and epoch in the history of democratic nations. Nearly a billion people exercised their franchise voting out a confident and well-entrenched regime, the National Democratic Alliance (NDA) led by the (BJP). The Congress, a party regarded as bereft of leadership, emerged a winner. India is a country with crushing problems: over 300 million people below poverty line, a literacy rate of less than 60% and widespread social and economic inequalities. Yet the masses in this country, otherwise voiceless and disempowered, came together to exercise their vote with stunning clarity of purpose, in a perfectly democratic manner.

When Mr. Vajpayee, Prime Minister in the NDA government, called the election six months ahead of schedule, it seemed to indicate a high level of optimism and confidence in their success. Encouraged by a buoyant stock market, an economy growing at the healthy rate of 10.6%, ballooning forex reserves, inflation in check, improved relations with Pakistan and a clean sweep in the State Assembly elections in October 2003, the NDA seemed poised for victory. It displayed its confidence through a high-tech election campaign, complete with film stars, television advertising and business jets and helicopters, to present to the voting public an image of ‘India Shining’.

The Congress, on the other hand, started as the underdog. Its campaign was low-key and aimed at states where they expected to win. The party president, Sonia Gandhi, was pragmatic and accommodating in her approach, networking with regional leaders and forging alliances with secular partners. In response to NDA’s ‘India Shining’, the Congress pitched their ‘Hand behind the Common Man’.

It was a strategy that paid rich dividends. The final results for the 539 seats in the (Lower House of Parliament) are as follows:

Congress + allies 219 NDA + allies 189 Left Front 61 Others (independents etc.) 70

- 1 -

The Congress along with its allies formed a coalition government, the United Progressive Alliance (UPA) with the support of the Left Front from the outside. Dr. Manmohan Singh, an eminent economist, career bureaucrat and former Finance Minister, a man universally respected for his integrity and competence, was chosen to be Prime Minister. Mrs Sonia Gandhi retained the post of party president but refused to join the government, thereby gaining moral stature and political maturity, in a country that reveres self-denial.

Repercussions for Civil Society

The result of the 2004 elections raises a number of questions regarding the nature of democratic processes in India. The citizen-state relationship, politics vs. governance and the reach of civil society institutions may be scrutinized through the lens of verdict 2004. In a vast and diverse country like India, with its burdens of large-scale poverty, illiteracy and social and economic inequality, as also its great potential as an IT and telecom superpower, what are the patterns of change that we can discern from the recent elections, that could shape future trends for development?

In general, the idea of civil society, comprising associational inter-linkages between people outside the State and Market was first proposed by Alexis de Tocqueville, a French thinker in early 19th century. It is a powerful notion with important connotations for democratic development. Defined variously by Liberals, Marxists and Neo-conservatives, it has both the positive aspect of providing a ‘free’ social space for critique and evaluation of state action as well as the negative potential of endorsing dominant hegemonies. When we try to apply this notion to a largely traditional society like India, replete with primordial social groupings like caste, family, region and religion, it assumes a unique dimension.

NGOs (Non-Governmental Organizations) are commonly seen as representing the interests of civil society. There has been a proliferation of NGOs worldwide over the past two decades, a trend seen as a move towards greater democratization. There are an estimated 2 million NGOs in India, many of which have participated in elections 2004 in various ways. A brief overview of the key NGO roles in the event will reveal whether or not their participation strengthened civil society.

1. NGOs as Observers: Organizations like PUCL (People’s Union for Civil Liberty) have been long-established watchdogs for India’s civil society. The PAC (Public Affairs Centre) has a specific mandate for electoral governance. After a protracted struggle, they succeeded in having the Supreme Court pass an order in March 2003, on the mandatory disclosure of financial assets, educational backgrounds and criminal records by candidates. Local organizations like Loksatta (Movement Movement for People’s Government)

- 2 - followed up on this by making public criminal charges against candidates in 2004. The CSDS (Centre for the Study of Developing Societies) conducted a comprehensive electoral survey, producing invaluable information, voting statistics and analyses that enriched public knowledge. 2. NGOs as Partners of Government Agencies: The Election Commission of India opened a window for dialogue with NGOs and other citizens’s groups to promote transparency in the electoral process. The NCPRI (National Campaign for People’s Right to Information) and the Campaign for Electoral Transparency were prominent organizations that worked to update the electoral rolls (www.indiatogether.org) At another level, some NGOs engaged with candidates and attempted to sensitize them to people’s needs. For example, YUVA in Mumbai presented alternative manifestos to candidates, focusing on the need for potable water. AGNI (Action for Good Governance and Networking in India) produced the Mumbai Citizns’ Charter, enumerating jobs, housing and governance as developmental priorities.

The above two categories are similar as they subsume NGOs that participated in the elections without political affiliation. The next category deviates from this. 3. Right wing NGOs: These largely consist of the , Hindu revivalists consisting of the VHP (Vishwa Hindu Parishad) RSS (Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh) and others. These are termed ‘social organizations’ by their leaders, and are used to propagate Hindu separatist ideology. They buttress the political influence of the BJP by building and mobilizing the Hindu votebanks, less through development initiatives and more through obscurantism and polemics against non-Hindu social and cultural forms. Working through organized local cadres, they have also used violence and terror as instruments of political mobilization in preparing for elections 2004.

In January 2004, the Hindu Jagran Manch (Hindu Revivalist Front) instigated violent mobs to attack the Christian community in Jhabua, Madhya Pradesh. A number of churches were burnt and Christians killed. In February 2004 in Orissa, converted Christians were publicly humiliated and their heads shaved by Bajrang Dal and VHP activists. The Sangh Parivar has set up Vanvasi Kalyan Ashrams (Tribal Welfare Centres) in areas with a large Christian population, ostensibly to persuade them to reconvert to Hinduism. These centres were used to incite Hindu mobs, even as part of the election campaign.

Sangh Parivar NGOs receive a large segment of their funds from non- resident Indians (NRIs) abroad. For example, the IDRF (India Development and Reconstruction Foundation) a Maryland, USA based NRI outfit, has recently been investigated by the US government for financing Right-wing Hindu organizations.

- 3 - 4. NGOs for Communal Harmony: To counter the communitarian influence of Right- wing NGOs, there were a number of organizations promoting harmony amongst communities during elections 2004. ‘Insaaniyat’ actively distributed pamphlets giving information and exhorting people to maintain social and cultural pluralism. Medha Patkar, leader of the Save Narmada Campaign, called for a secular coalition of NGOs country-wide to highlight grassroots level problems and counter NDA’s India Shining Campaign.

Thus, NGOs played an important role during elections 2004, though largely outside the political process. There were no well-known NGO leaders who stood for election to the Lok Sabha, with the rare exception of Sandip Dikshit from East Delhi. Except for the Sangh Parivar outfits, NGOs did not speak for any political party nor did theyr campaign for any candidate. They confined themselves to highlighting issues of democracy, transparency and strengthening participatory citizenship.

So why verdict 2004? Why was ‘India Shining’ obliterated by the ‘Common Man’? Could it be that the associational concerns of civil society asserted themselves over primordial social groups, or is it more complex than that? An overview of some salient features of the results may provide some answers.

A Complex of Many Factors

1. A view proposed by some sections of the press and endorsed by Left-wing parties (Communist Party of India, Communist Party of India, Marxist and the Forward Bloc) is that the verdict represents the voice of the poor against the NDA government’s pro-market ‘India Shining’ image. If that were true, how can one explain the victory of the BJD (Biju Janata Dal) an NDA partner, in Orissa, one of India’s poorest states? 2. Similarly, it is believed to be a backlash by impoverished drought-hit farmers, as in Andhra Pradesh, against the NDA’s high-tech and urban- centric model of development. This again does not explain why the BJP as a party scored over the Congress in Karnataka, also a drought-hit state which has seen a high degree of IT development in the recent past. Anti- incumbency seems to be major factor in these states, unlike in Orissa, where the BJD retained its eats comfortably. 3. As a critique of prevailing policy, the result does indicate the anger of farmers against an MNC (Multi-national companies) and FDI (foreign direct investment) centred investment in development, as in the northern state of Punjab, where the Congress government lost much ground. But in

- 4 - the neighbouring state of Haryana, which follows similar economic patterns, it was the Congress which swept the polls. 4. Despite Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka, the results are not a rejection of the economic reforms process, but are a demand for a more balanced pattern of growth. (See the analysis of the Common Minimum Programme below.) For example, the state of Delhi saw a reaffirmation of the Congress government, which has been carrying out large-scale fiscal and governance reforms, including the privatization of power distribution and the Right to Information law. 5. The verdict cannot even be fully explained as a move against poor governance. In Bihar and Uttar Pradesh, two states with an abysmal human development record, we see a triumphant return of the prevailing non-NDA regimes. (Indian Express, May 29, 2004) We must remember, however, that Bihar and UP are also victims of the conflict between religious fundamentalism, fuelled by Right-wing parties, and caste-based politics. Caught between the Devil and the deep sea, the people opted for caste-based networks, and the Yadavs (a caste group) and Muslims together voted against the BJP, which stood for Hindu fundamentalism in their perception.

Verdict 2004, therefore, is a complex amalgam of many factors, and local and regional concerns have played a major role in the different states. It is not necessarily a victory for civil society in its de Tocqevillian sense, as the support for caste-based and regional groups by the electorate in Bihar and UP indicates. However in states like Delhi, the voter has definitely endorsed a regime that gave them good governance.

A common theme underpinning the results forces us to rethink their regional and primordial basis. The vote is a mandate against religious fundamentalism and the violent espoused by the BJP and its Right-wing allies, particularly in Gujarat two years ago. This has been publicly acknowledged even by Mr Vajpayee during a spot of post-election soul searching. In areas where the BJP and its allies carried out their most strident campaigns, notably the temple centres of Mathura, Varanasi and Ayodhya (site of the much-disputed Babri Masjid) they suffered their worst reversals. There appeared to be widespread public feeling against the BJP government’s communitarian policies, from the ‘saffronization’ of school textbooks by the Human Resources Development Minister, Dr. M.M. Joshi (who lost the election) to blatantly anti-minority sloganeering by the VHP (Vishwa Hindu Parishad), Shiv Sena and Bajrang Dal, all extreme Right-wing organizations. The dictatorial manner in which laws like POTA (Prevention of Terrorism Act) were imposed to actually fulfill the BJP’s political agenda, was positively unconstitutional and added to the people’s mistrust of their democratic credentials.

An analysis of the voter profile reveals that religious minorities, particularly Muslims, came out in large numbers to cast their vote. In Jammu and Kashmir,

- 5 - they did so at the risk of their lives, braving threats by terrorist groups. The verdict therefore, demonstrates the solidarity of India’s diverse communities in defense of their pluralistic heritage, surmounting primordial associations. The very fact of the greater participation in the electoral process by minorities is an indicator of the extension of the democratic process. Data on voter turnout also disclosed that while the numbers of upper-caste voters has remained the same as in previous polls, or has actually gone down in some areas, the ranks of lower-caste voters, particularly Dalits (untouchables) has increased substantially. It is therefore clear that the fundamental right to vote has reached groups that were socially excluded in the past. There is a trend towards the coalescing of civil society and of greater participation of marginalized groups in the democratic process. (Hindustan Times, May 21, 2004)

Economic reform and the Citizen-State Relationship

“No power on earth can stop an idea whose time has come…” (Victor Hugo)

This was the sentiment expressed by Dr. Manmohan Singh as Finance Minister while presenting before Parliament India’s programme for economic reform and structural adjustment in 1991. How appropriate that he is now chosen to carry forward the reforms process in consonance with his original vision.

In its initial policy statements, the new government has declared its intention of ensuring that the economy grows annually at a steady rate of 7%-8%. This will enable the country to reduce its fiscal deficit (currently an alarming 10%-12%) and move towards poverty alleviation while maintaining social security measures. The Common Minimum Programme (CMP) adopted by the United Progressive Alliance and the Left Front promotes a Mixed Economy, not a Command or a Free Market economy.

At the core of the CMP lie two issues, upgradation of basic livelihoods, urban and rural, and the assertion of India’s secular and pluralistic values as enshrined in the Constitution. A most progressive move towards these goals is the National Employment Guarantee Act, a guaranteed 100 days of employment annually on minimum wage to one member of every rural and urban poor and lower middle class household. Regarding the ‘Right to Work’ as the State’s obligation towards its most vulnerable citizens is an ambitious task- the need of 100 million rural workers alone would require an outlay of Rs. 20,000 crores (millions?) It would be a massive effort at asset creation that could transform the face of rural India. (The Hindu, May 29, 2004) The Maharashtra Employment Guarantee Scheme implemented during the drought in the early 1980s in that state, was an exemplary model of state support for the landless rural labour, and averted a full- blown famine most effectively.

- 6 - The government also seeks to initiate a Food for Work programme to ensure a medium terms strategy for food and nutrition security. This would involve strengthening the public distribution system in rural and urban areas. Rural credit will be doubled over the next three years, providing relief to millions of drought – hit farmers, many of whom have committed suicide out of desperation induced by poverty. The new government appear to be laying out networks of social security, ‘safety nets’ to reduce the vulnerability of the poor.

In other words, the CMP bears the blue-print of the next stage of the reforms process, one that looks beyond the market deregulation at the redistribution of wealth to the vulnerable. In many ways the nature of the coalition government, representing diverse social and regional interests, represents the federal nature of the Republic, as well as India’s pluralism. A less monolithic Centre theoretically gives more power to regional electorates and creates greater space for civil society.

There are some misgivings about this ideal, though. The Congress-led government have only 145 seats in Parliament and require 128 more to maintain their majority. Hence their dependence on their allies, including the Left Front. The latter’s support, ‘from the outside’, is a situation described as the “privilege of a whore” – power without responsibility. (Meghnad Desai in Indian Express, May 30, 2004) Regional parties largely represent ‘regional sub-nationalisms’ and the petty loyalties of caste. They reinforce primordial power structures and are a retrograde move away from a national level civil society. Their demands for handouts and subsidies rather than a reduction of India’s fiscal deficit reflect their narrow and myopic concerns. The Left Front’s preoccupation with the continuation of an unreformed public sector with no thought to contain public spending, also does not cater to human development needs. It is an acknowledged fact that India needs to pursue a vigorous economic reform programme with greater fiscal discipline, a drastic restructuring of taxes and spending directed towards capacity-building of the poor and weaker sections of society.

Towards Democratization…

Elections 2004 definitely strengthened the role of democratic processes in Indian society. The electoral procedure itself saw the coming together of unequal social and economic groups in the solidarity of universal franchise. The people’s verdict largely overcame petty local interests and opted for larger, cross-cutting factors like the rejection of religious fundamentalism. An over-confident regime with a top-down style of functioning was replaced by a more loose coalition, incorporating a diversity of views. It is now the new government’s turn to create spaces for greater dialogue with civil society, and a healthy critique of their policies. The NDA’s top-down style of functioning - carrying out political agendas while presenting a superficial image of ‘India Shining’ – has been rejected by the

- 7 - Indian public. The UPA government should respond to the courage and conviction displayed by the Indian voter with transparency and integrity.

Elections 2004 is not the first time that the Indian voter has dramatically overturned an established regime. In 1977, the Congress under Mrs Indira Gandhi was roundly defeated following her imposition of Emergency and suspension of constitutional rights in the previous two years. The feature in common between verdict 1977 and 2004 is the essential hubris of the ruling regime and a tendency to take the voter for granted. Such arrogance underlay the NDA’s ‘India Shining’ advertising campaign, on which Rs. 200 crores were spent out of public money. On the whole, there was widespread rejection of the superficiality of a short-term growth rate and high-tech regional bubbles like Andhra Pradesh, and a refocusing on grassroots issues of livelihoods and citizenship.

Citizenship and India’s pluralistic heritage has undoubtedly been a factor in verdict 2004. The anti-Muslim pogroms in Gujarat are one aspect: the Hinduization of Indian history in school curricula, attempts to impose state control over independent institutions like the Indian Institutes of Management, have all fuelled public feeling against the BJP and its allies. Once again, the public has acted against the threat to its democratic values and unseated an authoritarian regime. It is now up to the new government to defend and sustain the trust placed in them by the electorate.

The verdict is not a simple one however. The prevalence of regional parties with diverse interests is a precarious situation, with a constant threat of instability looming over the horizon. The Sensex, India’s market indicator, reflected this uncertainty in the days following the result. It fell 800 points in a single day after some members of the Left Front announced their proposal to do away with public sector disinvestments! Thus while an arrogantly Right-wing regime has been removed and greater space created for democratic policy evaluation, the State’s authority and its decision-making process cannot be compromised.

The greatest threat to the UPA government’s stable functioning are its inner contradictions – between local and national interests, between populist and short-term policies and genuine guidelines for sustained national growth and between individual egos and national interests. It is up to Dr. Singh and his team to make such principled decisions and lead the country further on the road to progress. They owe it to the people of India.

- 8 -

- 9 -