The country is one integral whole
The country is one integral whole
Dr S Kalyanaraman
“Though the country and the people may be divided into different states (provinces) for convenience of administration, the country is one integral whole, its people a single people living under a single imperium derived from a single source.”
—Dr BR Ambedkar, Chairman, Drafting Committee of the Constitution of India
Justice Madan Mohan Punchhi, Former Chief Justice of India was appointed in April 2007, to head a Commission on Centre-State Relations. The Commission’s Report in 7 volumes was presented to Govt. of India on 31 March 2010. An earlier Commission on Centre-State (Province) Relations (referred to as the Sarkaria Commission after the name of its Chairman Justice R.S. Sarkaria) in its report submitted in 1988 observed:- “Decentralisation of real power to local institutions would help defuse the threat of centrifugal forces, increase popular involvement all along the line, broaden the base of our democratic polity, promote administrative efficiency and improve the health and stability of inter-governmental relations… Unfortunately, there was not only inadequate territorial and functional decentralisation in India when the country became independent, but there has also been a pervasive trend towards greater centralisation of powers over the years, inter alia, due to the pressure of powerful socio- economic forces” – (Volume I, p.543).
Recognising this democratic deficit, the Constitution was amended in 1992 (73rd and 74th Constitution Amendment Acts) to introduce a third tier system of governance at the level of Panchayats and Municipalities.
The question posed to the Punchhi Commission was: ‘Are the existing arrangements governing Centre-State (Province) relations – legislative, executive and financial – envisaged in the Constitution as they have evolved over the years, working in a manner that can meet the aspirations of the Indian society as also the requirements of an increasingly globalising world? If not, what are the impediments and how can they be remedied without violating the basic structure of the Constitution?’
The Punchhi Commission notes: “The dictum of ‘basic structure’ of the Constitution propounded by the Supreme Court in the celebrated Keshavananda Bharati case also tied the hands of the Centre in important ways. The effect, inter alia, was that while the States (Provinces) felt handicapped in pursuing development programmes of their own for lack of adequate funds, the Centre found itself hamstrung even when there was serious breakdown in law and order in some areas.” (Vol. 1, p. xxi)
Making over 200 recommendations, the Punchhi Commission also recommended amendment of Articles 355 and 356 to enable Central rule of trouble-torn areas, an internal security structure on the lines of the US Homeland Security department, making National Integration Council meaningful by making NIC meet at least once a year, and amending the Communal Violence Bill to allow deployment of Central forces without the state’s (province’s) consent for a short period, removal of a Governor through impeachment by the State (Province) assembly and providing for a say to the state (Province) Chief Minister in the appointment of governor, giving a right to the Governor to sanction prosecution of a minister against the advice of the Council of Ministers.
Overall, the recommendations of the two Commissions—Sarkaria Commission and Punchhi Commission – have been disappointing skirting the main issue of resolving the developmental imperative of the ratram with the security imperative of the rashtram.
Both the Commissions and the standing Finance Commissions which have been appointed every five years, have missed the wood for the trees, by suggesting tinkering with the system by looking at the instruments of state as instruments of violence.
These Commissions have failed to recognise the serious threats faced by the rashtram on the key issues of integrity and security caused by 1) the threats of destroying the polity by criminalisation and corrupt practices; and 2) the national security threats from external and internal sources of fomenting communal tensions, by Naxalite or Maoist insurgencies and hostile neighbours seeking lebensraum. The colonial loot of unprecedented dimensions have been rivalled by the post-colonial loot by stashing away black money in tax havens abroad. (One estimate given by Director, CBI reckons this at US Dollars 500 billion, that is, Rs. 20 lakh crores). Effective remedial measures have not been suggested to undo the devastation caused to national integration efforts by the formation of Pakistan and by not commending steps to implement Article 44 of the Constitution of India which calls for a Uniform Civil Code. Article 44 is merely the first step in achieving a sense of identity among all citizens of India that they owe allegiance to the Rashtram, saying no to sectarian ideologies and false denominations of secularism.
While all men are created equal, traditions of India, that is Bharat, hold that dharma-dhamma has endowed us with certain unalienable responsibilities for abhyudayam and nihshreyas (social welfare and individual unity of the atman with paramatman). The Rashtram is a dharma-dhamma saapeksha rashtram. This inalienable dictum, this dharma-dhamma, this foundation of the rashtram which cannot be surrendered, sold or transferred for any ideology, should get enshrined in the Preamble to the Constitution by declaring a dharma-dhamma saapeksha rashtram. This dharma-dhamma declaration should precede any attempt to restate the structural features of the state.
If this Constitutional Amendment is beyond the powers of the Parliament pace Keshavananda Bharati case, let there be a new Constituent Assembly to redraw the dharma constitution for the rashtram. The absurd definition of secularism gets exemplified by devious attempts made to translate ‘secular’ in the Preamble as ‘dharma nirapekshata’ in Hindi official version of the Constitution kept in Rashtrapati Bhavan. Luckily, this bizarre translation was not approved and the word ‘secular’ was translated into Hindi as: ‘pantha nirapekshata’, that is, neutrality as to individual religious path preferences.
How should a dharma saapeksha rashtram be structured? Rashtram is the path which enlightens. The supreme divinity is rashtrii, the divine force which defines all dharmas in all walks of life and all facets of existence in a sustainable global order for wealth creation, equitable distribution and use. Such a rashtram calls for a United States along the Indian Ocean Rim to create an Indian Ocean Community remembering that the largest Vishnu mandiram of the globe is in Angkor Wat, Cambodia. Such a federation of about 59 states along the Indian Ocean Rim will be an economic powerhouse for abhyudayam of over 3 billion people. This organisation can undo the raves of the colonial regimes which left many of these states in an impoverished state.
Such a federating union has to federate local communities, recognised as Panchayats or Municipalities or Corporations in the Indian state and comparable formations in other states of the Indian Ocean Rim.
The imperative of empowering local communities, janapadas will be consonant with the traditional forms which had evolved over millennia for involving the people of the janapadas in socio-economic activities. A good example is provided by the Uttaramerur inscription of the 12th century which described the formation of village councils after due democratic elections and after due process of selecting council members of exemplary rectitude, from within the community. Such localisation of developmental activity (abhyudayam) will mean the transfer of power directly to the people. This transfer has to become meaningful by an automatic transfer of central finances directly to the Panchayat Raj institutions for projects such as local, small-scale industries, maintenance of roads, building and maintenance of schools, primary health-care centers and other civic responsibilities of the Panchayat. The Panchayat will also have to be empowered to monitor the functioning of large industries within the geographical domain of the Panchayat, even if it means the control of, say, a nuclear power station. The present structure of central-state (province) division of responsibilities by State (Province), Central and Concurrent Lists has to be radically revamped to entrust responsibilities to the third tier, the Panchayat.
Inter-state transactions of trade, defense and foreign affairs can be the responsibility of the Centre. Providing for enabling legislative framework can be the responsibility of the state. The real executive has to be the Janapada, the Panchayat. This structural formation for a Rastram is a feasible proposition which can build upon the types of structures which have been proven to work effectively, for example, in Peoples’ Republic of China. Decentralise for development and integrity of the state, centralise for security of the state from trans-border threats such as those from terrorism or religious conversion missions. A Peoples’ Parliament can be brought into being to provide for an ideological umbrella to the Parliamentary institutions such as the Lok Sabha or Rajya Sabha in India. The Peoples’ Parliament should be composed as a Constituent Assembly .
In India, there are 640 districts. Each district should elect four representatives from among the Panchayati Raj institutions to function as members of the Peoples’ Parliament which is the Constituent Assembly. This Assembly should meet at least once a year to oversee the discharge of legislative functions entrusted to the Provinces and the Panchayats Raj institutions. The Peoples’ Parliament should also define the Centre-Province-Panchayati Raj institutional responsibilities using three lists: Central List, Province List, Panchayat List. These lists should be a total revamp of the existing Union, State and Concurrent lists defining the responsibilities of the structural components of the India polity.
The structure of the Rashtram as a trans-national structure, can be regulated with the following broad allocation of responsibilities, as lists, to the three constituent institutions: Constituent Assembly, State Parliament, Panchayat Administration.
Rashtram list to include: Inter-state commerce and inter-state development projects such as Trans-Asian Highway, Trans-Asian Railway, Implementation of the Law of the Sea by extending territorial waters to 200 nautical miles from the base, Interpol.
State list to include: defence, atomic energy, foreign affairs, citizenship, transport, communication, currency..
Panchayat list to include: local government, education, police, justice, agriculture, commerce, banking, insurance, control of industries, development of mines, mineral and oil resources, elections, civil code, public health and sanitation, agriculture, animal husbandry, water supplies and irrigation, land rights, forests, fisheries.
(The writer is at Saraswati Research Centre, Former Sr. Exec., Asian Development Bank, National President, Rama Sethu Protection Movement)
Comments