Badle badle meri (AAP) sarkar nazar aate hain
Amba Charan Vashishth
Great Britain has no written constitution. The monarchical Westminster form of parliamentary democracy there hinges on its great traditions and precedents. The British take pride in being strict sticklers to the law, traditions and precedents. But, on the contrary, in our form of parliamentary democracy where we claim to be following the Westminster style, we take pride in breaking the traditions and precedents. We do swear by the Constitution but, at the same time, the ruling political party does everything to tame it to realise party’s narrow political ambitions and sectarian electoral goals in which the interest of the nation, invariably, stand isolated.
A new political outfit named Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) composed mostly of novices in the field in just one year of its existence succeeded to catch the imagination of Delhi to capture 28 out of 70 seats and also to defeat the Chief Minister Mrs Sheila Dixit by a huge margin of about 26 thousand votes. It is an unusual happening in the electoral history of India. Though BJP emerged as the single largest party with 32 seats, four short of absolute majority, yet it preferred not to form a government than indulge in horse-trading. The ruling Congress stood reduced to paltry 8 seats. JD(U) won one seat and one went to an independent.
Even a day before declaration of results, AAP leader Arvind Kejriwal sworn by his children (God, save them!) stressing that his party would neither seek nor extend support to either BJP or Congress.
After haggling and bargaining the Congress decided to give ‘unconditional’ support of its 8-member group from outside to AAP Government.
It was the miracle of this parliamentary democracy that a ruling party badly mauled at the hustings could still be on the right side of power enjoying all the privileges of a ruling party except government bungalows, red beacon lights fitted luxury cars and staff. It provides fuse to the AAP Government and luxuriates at the cost of government without accountability.
The ‘honest’ AAP stooped down to accept support from ‘corrupt’ Congress—the same Congress most of whose ministers, till the declaration of election results, the party had been vowing to throw in jail for ‘corruption’.
Finally, AAP Government with Arvind Kejriwal as Chief Minister took oath on December 23. It was asked to prove majority in the house by January 3. In the process many unusual happenings took place. Many of the great traditions and precedents got crashed into rubble.
Since India won independence, it had been a tradition that the senior most MLA belonging to any party is nominated by the Governor to function as pro-tem Speaker to administer oath to newly elected MLAs. When Lt Governor nominated the senior most MLA belonging to BJP as pro-tem Speaker, the latter declined the offer. Congress followed suit. Ultimately, an AAP MLA was nominated as pro-tem Speaker. After oath of MLAs, the pro-tem Speaker is supposed conduct the election of the Speaker. Thereafter the Governor/Lt Governor addresses the newly elected Assembly in which the future programmes and policies of the new Government are enunciated. It is only after that the House can conduct its normal business and take-up the vote of confidence.
Kejriwal claimed that his government may continue or be defeated in the house, he is not bothered. He wished to fulfill some of the promises made to the electorate.
But the question arises: Is a government which has yet to prove its majority and consequently its legitimacy constitutionally by tradition and by law empowered to do so?
As a rule, a vote of confidence is moved by the Chief Minister or the Prime Minister. It is he who replies on the conclusion of the debate and seeks approval of the house. This practice too was dispensed with. The motion was not moved by Chief Minister Kejriwal but by one of his colleagues. Both the opposition BJP and ally Congress made certain points, sought certain clarifications and made certain allegations during the debate. It was also for the first time that a Chief Minister chose to completely ignore all the points raised and allegations made during the debate. He preferred to keep silent on controversial issues as he felt convinced that silence was gold in the circumstances.
What was starkly eloquent and piercing the ears of the viewers was the absence of the sharpness of Kejriwal’s determination and commitment to stand by each and every word he gave to the people.
Kejriwal had been branding Congress and CM Sheila Dixit as “corrupt” and claiming himself to be “honest” on posters. Ironically today, he is challenging the opposition to come out with proof against Sheila Government.
This reminds us of the scene before 1989 Lok Sabha elections when in public meetings VP Singh used to boldly take out a piece of paper from his pocket saying it contains the names of those who received the Bofors kickbacks. But after he became Prime Minister he forgot everything and that piece of paper too disappeared.
VP Singh history seems to be repeating in the case of Kejriwal. Now one only recalls a popular Hindi film song: Ab to badle badle (AAP) sarkar nazar aate hain, ghar ki…
(The writer is a Delhi-based political analyst)
Aam Aadmi Party’s main strategist and spokesperson Yogender Yadav’s pseudo-secularist face is gradually getting exposed. He may be seen championing the cause of aam aadmi in Delhi, fact is that he seems to be the part of a wider conspiracy bent upon defaming India everywhere and also even poisoning the young adolescent minds of the country. This face of senior AAP leader stands exposed from the NCERT’s political science book being taught to Class XI students in Delhi and various other parts of the country. Chapter 8 of the book, Political Theory, under the title ‘Secularism’ (page 112) teaches Gujarat riots to the students. Shri Yogender Yadav is one of the chief advisors of the NCERT’s text book development committee, which prepared this text book.
The said book gives some examples which remind of the massacre of Sikhs in Delhi, several thousands of Kashmir Pandits and Gujarat riots of 2002.Under chapter ‘Inter Religious Domination’, it states: “In our own country, the Constitution declares that every Indian citizen has a right to live with freedom and dignity in any part of the country. Yet in reality, many forms of exclusion and discrimination continue to persist. Consider three most stark examples:
p Nearly four thousand Sikhs were massacred in Delhi and many other parts of the country in 1984. The families of the victims feel that the guilty were not punished.
p Several thousands of Hindu Kashmiri Pandits have been forced to leave their homes in the Kashmir valley; they have not been able to return to their homes for more than two decades.
p Nearly two thousand Muslims were massacred in Gujarat in 2002. The surviving members of many of these families still cannot go back to the villages in which they lived.
What do these examples have in common? They all have to do with discrimination in one form or the other. In each case members of one community have been targeted and victimised on account of their religious identity. In other words, basic freedom of a set of citizens is denied. Some might even say that these incidents are instances of religious persecution and they reflect inter-religious domination.”
“All these examples taught in the classroom to the young adolescent students shall go on creating rifts among the different communities, caste and creed. The aim of education is to create harmony of man with a man and harmony of a man with the society and the state. The NCERT book is damaging the very fabric of the society. It should be withdrawn immediately and the Government should ban it,” said Shri Dinanath Batra, national convener of Shiksha Bachao Andolan Samiti, in a letter to NCERT Director, New Delhi on January 6, 2014.
Kejriwal in his many statements has repeatedly stressed that political arrogance should be totally removed and Aam Aadmi should be treated with dignity.
Hence citizens of India are feeling a sense of self-respect after 60 years of inferiority complex, caused by the arrogance of leaders of all Political parties. After 700 years of slavery, respect to them is important along with development for the people.
They wish that all Netas should follow Aap’s non – VIP culture along with its gimmicks. There are arrogant leaders barring few at the top who do not look at others, don’t talk to cadres and members of the party on phone because they think it below their dignity. This is feudalism.
But Kejriwal has revolutionised the political atmosphere and thrown the political arrogance in the dustbin with his broom, though; due to lack of experience he cannot achieve anything substantial as Modi did. It will take him twenty years to learn.
Today citizens will not tolerate any arrogance in a political party. The complaints of which I have been receiving since long. Hence as a self less well wisher of the BJP since 30 years I wish to alert them towards the changed psychology of the masses and suggest them that now arrogance will not be good for the future of the BJP.