Relevance of Parliamentary Debates in the context of Social Justice, Empowerment, and Development Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in Rajya Sabha (1955-59 and 2003-2007) Exploring the Politics of Presence in the context of Rajya Sabha 31 January 2014 Submitted by Dr. Rahul Ramagundam ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR, DR. K R NARAYANAN CENTRE FOR DALIT AND MINORITIES STUDIES, JAMIA MILLIA ISLAMIA, JAMIA NAGAR, NEW DELHI 110025 TEL. 011-26921397 (O); 09818907590 (M) E.mail: [email protected] 1 Index Preface 1. The Rajya Sabha 2. Affirmative Policy 3. The Harijan Sahib 4. Coalition Casualty: Representation and its value 5. Conclusion Annexure to Chapter 3 Annexure to Chapter 4 2 Preface Does representation really matter? This archaic sounding question is still significant in the context of India’s Upper House, the Rajya Sabha. This research paper explores the nature of representation in the Rajya Sabha by an interrogation of parliamentary Questions and Debates on marginalized communities, particularly the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (SCs and STs) within its precincts. Generally too, the issue of representation is significant as is evident from the long term scare left in the wake of the Poona Pact of 1932. The makers of the Indian constitution adopted certain enabling provisions for representation of the marginalized population segments such as the SCs and STs in the parliamentary democracy. Given their social and economic condition, it was assumed, it would be difficult for an SC or ST to get elected on their own if no special reservation is given. However, the constitutional provision for representation of the marginalized in the Parliament is limited to the Lower House alone. The Rajya Sabha has no such provisions. How far, in qualitative and quantitative terms, this systemic limitation has informed the parliamentary debates within the Rajya Sabha, is the subject of this research work. In the absence of constitutionally assured representation of the marginalized in the Upper House, I explore if there has been any neglect of the issues concerning the marginalized in its deliberations and discussions? In other words, does the absence of members from the marginalized sections sent through the constitutionally provisioned process of reservations lead to their erasure from the debating concerns of the members present? Does some anomaly, some distortion creeps in, in the views of the Members about the SC/ST? Such questions become imperative, as while profile of the lower house has undergone metamorphosis due to infusion of members from lower and backward castes, the Rajya Sabha membership has remained somewhat socially conservative and elitist. Why is this so is perfectly comprehensible, although theoretically perplexing as the electoral college comprising of popularly elected state legislatures that elect Rajya Sabha members itself has undergone marked change due to the ‘silent social revolution’ springing forth backward caste political leaders in hordes. One reason is, increasingly, richer candidates of various caste denominations are making their way to the elected legislatures. For instance, a study found out that in the current fifteenth Lok Sabha alone there are some 300 members from a total strength of 543 who are crorepatis.1 Although, such studies on the State Assemblies are yet to ascertain their own crorepati members, given the cost of electioneering involved, they might not be lagging behind too far. It fetches to have richer candidates. 1 According to available data, 315 of the 543 MPs in the current Lok Sabha are crorepatis. They include 275 male MPs and 40 women, as per data compiled by the Association of Democratic Reforms (ADR) and National Election Watch (NEW). There were 156 crorepatis in the 2004 Lok Sabha and the number increased by 102 percent in the present Lok Sabha. The average asset of an MP in the previous Lok Sabha was Rs.0.86 crore, which shot up to Rs.5.33 crore in the present house. ‘MPs: Crorepatis or underpaid public servants?’ http://www.thaindian.com/newsportal/politics/mps-crorepatis-or-underpaid-public-servants_100420190.html 3 If that is the scenario in the Lok Sabha, then for the Rajya Sabha it is less said the better. Here members are elected from fake domiciled states of ordinary residences on account of their influences or monetary worth, political parties nominating candidates issue restraining whips to make the Electoral College fall for party-sponsored candidates, rich, business-people break all norms, buy votes and win by standing independently. Among the 183 Rajya Sabha MPs whose asset details were analysed by the ADR-NEW in April 2010, 54 percent were found to be millionaires. Most parties preferred nominating candidates with high assets during the June 2010 Rajya Sabha biennial elections, according to an analysis of the affidavits of 49 of 55 candidates. Out of 54 contesting candidates, 43 (79.6 percent) were millionaires. Of the winners, 38 out of 49 (77.6 percent) had assets in millions of rupees. The average asset for the candidates was Rs.24.45 crore, and for the winners it was Rs.25.24 crore. So, in some such sense Indian parliamentary system constituting of twin legislative houses is increasingly becoming an abode of rich irrespective of their social profile. How much of it might get reflected in the tone and tenor of debates remains a cause of concern? In this paper, I consciously disregard the limitation imposed by the entry of rich members and explore whether members’ socio-ethnic profile affects the nature of parliamentary debates in the Upper House. Or, are the concerns as expressed in debates go beyond the narrow boundaries of caste, class, creed, gender or ethnicity? This study seeks to intensively explore how questions and debates in Rajya Sabha have focused on SCs and STs. How relevant has been the debates and discussions in the Rajya Sabha in the context of empowering India’s marginalized and vulnerable sections? The study had twin hypothesis as markers of departure. They were: (i) The quality and balanced representation of the various social segments in the political system helps in the establishment of inclusive policy, and its absence in exclusion (ii) The nature and concerns of parliamentary debates reflect the interest and social composition of parliamentarians My research proposal that concerned itself with the Rajya Sabha debates during the two five year periods of 1955-60 and 2003-2008 entailed following research areas: 1. Questions pertaining to SC/ST asked by members in RS during given periods 2. Various Debates on issues related directly as well as indirectly with SC/ST during given two periods 3. Scanning through members’ profile as published by the RS to know their socio- economic backgrounds and political ideologies The idea was to explore if it is necessary to have a physical presence of the representatives from marginalized communities to enable their concerns being deliberated in the august body. In short, I intended to explore the ‘politics of presence’ by interrogating questions, debates and political consciousness of the members. In doing so, I kept in my mind, the greatest gift to the human mind, the power of imagination, and asked, while reading Members’ Parliamentary interventions, if there were Members who could overcome the primordial as well as modern boundaries and could imagine pain of the other and produce empathy and empowerment. In exploring my research hypothesis, I focus on a gamut of forums available to members to voice their concern. We are focusing on Oral and Written Questions, Government Bills, Private Members’ Bills, Short Duration Discussion, half-an-hour discussion, resolutions, motions etc to comprehend the political mind of this country that functions within the 4 precincts of the Rajya Sabha. Questions and Answers Sessions is one main way of eliciting information on various subjects from the government sources. Questions asked in parliament show an important change that has occurred over the years. Parliamentarians enjoyed a statutory right over the supply of information. The government had to supply with the authentic information on issues raised by Members. Today, the same privilege, with some exceptions, has been extended to the general public under the Right to Information Act. This is a momentous change as right to information has been truly democratized. The study collated and classified questions raised by the members, debates held across the party lines and responses given by the treasury benches. In this regard, our point of reference is two parliamentary quinquennials of 1955-60 and 2003-2008. Imbued with a comparative methodology, the study interrogates location of focus and concerns of debates with reference to vulnerable sections both in India’s idealistic and immediate post-independence years (1955-60) as well as during the recent regimes (2003-2008) of the two mainstream political formations. It covers various regimes as well as periods of both idealism and cynicism. The study primarily depends on sources drawn from actual debates that took place within the precincts of the Rajya Sabha. The study has used recorded Rajya Sabha debates and discussion for classification and analysis of questions raised, ministerial responses, and debates held during the given time periods. An analysis of questions asked in Rajya Sabha throws up following possibilities: Tables/graphs showing categories of SC/ST issues. Nature of questions shall help in building a typology/classification of questions under certain