& 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

A proposal for resolving the political impasse

Wahiduddin Mahmud
I \lE chances for a political settlement between the government and the opposition regarding the ->- modalities of holding the upcoming parliamentary elections seem increasingly slim. Discussions on this have been so far confined to what concessions either side is willing to make to the other. Perhaps the time has now come to turn attention to what each side can and should do unilaterally. This will enable the citizens to judge the commitment of both to abide by the rules and norms of democratic practice. In the process, even a solution may emerge.
What the main party in power can do:
By removing the constitutional provisions for an election-time caretaker government, the prime minister and her party have taken upon themselves a daunting responsibility, namely, to create equal opportunities for all parties in the upcoming elections proposed to be held under a political government dominated by the main ruling party. They have, in effect, taken the challenge of fulfilling this responsibility in a convincingly credible and visible way that will be subject to citizens' scrutiny.
The expectations of the people about what can be called a level playing field for all parties are based on the standards set by the previous elections held under caretaker governments. The steps that need to be taken include: a drive for neutralising armed gangs irrespective of which political party patronises them; freeing BTV and other government media from partisan political influence and using them instead for voter education; identifying officials in key positions having strong political affiliation and removing them elsewhere; making enough changes in local level administration so as to convey an effective message for playing a neutral role; directing the law enforcing agencies in an open and convincing way to perform their duties without political bias; and above all, reconstituting the Election Commission partially or wholly as needed.
This is admittedly a tall order of things to expect from a partisan political government, albeit reconstituted for the election time. But the citizens will want to be assured of at least a minimum guarantee of a free and fair election environment. After all, ruling party leaders have time and again made assurances that they will be able to deliver on it. Another area of complications will be regarding the code of conduct of the Parliament members if they continue to hold their positions until the elections are over - a problem that the caretaker governments did not have to deal with. As for the prime minister, she will have the dual responsibility of leading the election campaign of her party and at the same time ensuring that the administration remains non-partisan. This will be an extremely difficult task, if not impossible. In the more well-developed democracies, this is not a problem since the integrity of administration and other independent state institutions are not compromised by undue politicisation. If the prime
minister in her honest judgment thinks that it is too difficult for her to perform this dual responsibility, she may consider handing over the responsibility of running the government to someone else, which will be considered an exemplary move in improving the election environment.
What the main opposition party can do:
The main opposition party can justifiably feel aggrieved by the way the system of caretaker government has been abolished by the ruling party. But in the absence of any compromise solution, they have to choose among the options that are available to them for unilateral decision. By declaring a conditional decision to participate in the election, they can throw a challenge to the prime minister and her party leaders to live up to their promise of holding a free and fair election. They can convert their negative agenda of foiling the elections into a legitimate democratic movement around demands for creating a fair election environment. By launching such a movement against many odds, they can contribute to the consolidation of the democratic system and in that way they can also gain public sympathy. On the other hand, agitation for foiling the elections may lead to violence and acts of sabotage, which will not help anyone, and public support for the legitimate demands of the opposition may even get eroded.
By not joining in the electiontime government, they main opposition party will not have to bear responsibility for any failure of this government. But even if they choose to join the so-called all-party government, they will have the option of resigning from it and even boycotting the elections. And if they get defeated through vote rigging and election manipulations, they will be able to launch a mass movement by presenting credible evidences of the alleged irregularities. Experiences of other newly democratised countries tell us that a post-election mass movement, rather than election boycott, has a better chance of success in unseating a government bent on perpetuating its rule through unfair means.
What the civil society can do:
Once the main opposition party declares its intention to participate in the elections, the duty of the civil society will be to put pressure on the government to remove impediments to holding fair elections. In this task at least, the civil society can remain united irrespective of support for particular parties or ideological differences. This therefore will be a testing time for the civil society as well.
If the government is honest in its pledge to ensure a free and fair election environment, it can form an advisory body consisting of eminent and experienced non-partisan members of the civil society. It need not even necessarily be a formal body. All the previous caretaker governments regularly sought advice from such persons. There is all the more need for seeking such advice in the case of a political election-time government. Partisan advisors will not be of much use.
The writer is an economist and a member of the United Nations Committee for Development Policy.