& çâÌæÚUæð´ ·¤è ¥ôÚU Îð¹Ùæ ÁæÚUè ÚU¹ð´ ¥ÍæüÌ ¥ÂÙð ÜÿØ ÂÚU ŠØæÙ ÚU¹ð´Ð ãæÚU Ù ×æÙð´, €UØô´ç·¤ ·¤æ× ·¤ÚUÙð âð ¥æÂ·¤ô ©gðàØ ·¤è Âýæç# ãôÌè ãñ ¥õÚU ÁèßÙ ·¤æ ¹æÜèÂÙ ÎêÚU ãôÌæ ãñÐ ÖÜð ãè ÁèßÙ ×ð´ ç·¤ÌÙè Öè ·¤çÆÙæ§ü €UØô´ Ù ¥æ°, çÁ™ææâæ ¥õÚU ©ˆâæã ÕÙæ° ÚU¹ð´Ð ŠØæÙ ÚU¹ð´, ÜÿØ ã×ðàææ ¥æÂ·Ô¤ Âæâ ãôÌð ãñ´ çÁ‹ãð´ ÂæÙð ·Ô¤ çÜ° ÂýØæâ ¥æÂ ·¤Öè Öè àæéM¤ ·¤ÚU â·¤Ìð ãñ´Ð

CROSSCURRENTS

Why Not Involve Political Parties in UP Elections?

by CAF Dowlah
***As long as the current system of electioneering remains at the UP level, chances of holding "free, fair and peaceful" elections would remain a utopian dream.***
THE country's Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) appears to be ready to hold the upcoming Union Parlshad (UP) elections in a free, fair and peaceful atmosphere. Reports suggest that he has not only appealed to the political parties to extend their cooperation for this purpose, he has also warned the potential ''trouble-makers, law-breakers and terrorists" of "dire consequences" in case they attempt to spoil the show.
According to the statements made by him on Sunday last, the trouble-makers will be dealt with severely — no matter what party they belong to. Similarly, numerous reports everyday suggest that the government is equally ready, to ensure "free, fair and peaceful" elections. Under such a concerted effort — where neither the government nor the Election Commission would allow any deviations from "free, fair and peaceful" elections — the elections should take place in a "free, fair and peaceful" manner.
Unfortunately, if the records of previous UP elections are any guide, it can be safely stated that chances are very high that the actual happenings in the upcoming elections would be no different from previous ones. All of those elections had been marked by hundreds and thousands of reported and unr$-
ported cases of violence, rigging. result manipulations. „iu other kinds of unfair and corrupt practices. In most cases, the law-breakers and troublemakers went scott-free — although never the Election Commission or the power-that-be forgot to warn stern measures" against them.
If that's the record, what happened in the meantime to expect that this time around things would be diametrically different? That the candidates will behave according to the prescribed rules? That they will limit their election expenses in accordance with EC rules? That powers of money, muscles, and connections will not have a free hand? That the government officials — who would be responsible for managing the show — would be neutral? That the police and the other security forces — that will be responsible for maintaining order — will not bend the rules in favour of those who can pay them or protect them?
The fact that the Election Commission as well as the government have to come up with similar kinds of statements as before — that they won't allow any unfair means — itself sug gesta that holding UP elections
In a "free, fair and peaceful manner" is not an easy Job. The fact that the EC has been consistently warning "troublemakers. terrorists and lawbreakers" — irrespective of political affiliations — of dire consequences, itself indicates that the political parties are squarely responsible for most of the troubles on the way of holding "free, fair and peaceful elections" in thp country.
What have the nation done lately to tame down the shrew — the political parties? If the political parties are the at the roots of all evils — what has the EC done lately to make them respectful to Its rules? Reportedly, the EC has asked them to keep the UP elections out of their partisan politics. Isn't It Illogical to ask for their cooperation, without allowing their involvement in the UP elections?
Why the political parties caruiot participate actively in the UP elections? Is there any constitutional bar on the way?
How do you promote political party-led democratic culture in tne country without allowing active involvement of political parties at the grassroots level? Moreover, if the parliamentary elections cannot be held under the EC in a "free, fair and peaceful manner," what are the rea-
sons to believe that the UP elections would be so under its supervision? Are the Union Parishads — that represent one of the best democratic traditions of the country — so unimportant that they can be literally administered by bureaucracy, and their elections can be safely entrusted with the EC that is almost always tough on framing rules, but weak on their enforcement?
The point is. as long as the current system of electioneering remains at the UP level, chances of holding "free, fair and peaceful" elections would remain a utopian dream. The UP elections are not only mere elections —- these are occasions for renewals of social and family relations and connections, these are occasions of upholding traditional bonds, orches-trating political polarisations, and demonstrating famity-progeny dominations. These are almost always bitterly fought — in many cases these are fought with blood as well as sweat, with money as well as power, and with risking guts as well as glory.
Anybody having any practical idea about these elections would know how helpless the administration could be in dealing with such fiercely fought elections? The administration, under the present system of governance, routinely fails to confront law-breakers, terrorists and trouble-makers, who are. in most cases, sheltered by powerful political forces. Under the present sociopolitico-administrative set-up. it is simply impossible for the administration to be colourblind. How can it do Justice to
its commitment to neutrality in such a situation? Where is the civic society or the legal framework to protect the civil servants from the caprices of the power-be? How can the EC guarantee that the administration will function neutrally? What can it do if they don't? More importantly, what did it do when they didn't in the past?
It is, therefore, wrong not to allow the political parties to sponsor candidates at the UP level. There is no constitutional bar to it. Moreover, in many democratic countries, including in neighboring India, such local elections are routinely held under political party sponsorships. There are certain advantages associated with it. It helps the people — at grassroots level — to know what party stands for what kind of people, what party stands for what kind of programmes, and above all. it provides the people with an organized opposition at grassroots level to keep an ever-vigilant eye on the performance of the winning candidate.
Moreover, the administration will be less able to manoeuvre election processes or outcomes, if major candidates are associated with major political parties. Under the current system the people are deprived of all of the above, and many others that are not mentioned here.