The politics of Anna's fast
No govt. in India has bent over backwards to please a civil society campaign as much as Dr. Manmohan Singh's in substantially accommodating the Jan Lokpal Bill drafted by a small group, including Anna Hazare, created by an NGO called India Against Corruption (IAC). And no individual act has recently attracted as much support as Mr. Hazare's fast for passing the Bill on terms dictated by him.
The drama unfolding over the past fortnight could lead to a stronger Lokpal than officially intended. But the Lokpal will also probably have excessive powers. Much will depend on how wisely Parliament's Standing Committee on legal matters handles the issue and whether Team Anna shows more flexibility than it has so far.
The government's ham-handed actions have ended up strengthening a particular type of civil society movement, which bypass the normal processes of democracy and claim moral authority superior to that of the people's elected representatives.
The government's Lokpal Bill was weak. But IAC's Bill too is flawed. An all-powerful Lokpal is no magic wand against corruption. The Lokpal would enter the picture only after corruption has occurred. But to pre-empt and control corruption, especially where it affects the poor, other means are needed.
The IAC Bill would create a gigantic parallel government, which subsumes the Central Bureau of Investigation and Vigilance Commission and usurps police, investigative, prosecution and quasi-judicial powers. This violates the democratic principle of separation of powers.
Corruption doesn't occur primarily, as Team Anna holds, because there's no "independent, empowered … anti-corruption institution." The real reasons include unequal access to power and rent-seeking based on it; neoliberal policies of privatising common property resources; super-greedy entrepreneurs; compromised civil servants; and a dysfunctional justice delivery system.
Correcting these will need electoral reform, social audit of important programmes, good grievance redressal, and laws on judicial accountability, whistleblower protection, and rights to public services. Such measures have been suggested by Aruna Roy's National Campaign for People's Right to Information. Anna ignores them.
Anna has been projected as a messiah. His team demands that its Bill be instantly passed without amendments -- on pain of the government being toppled. This subverts debate and imposes the will of a handful on the nation.
Team Anna members question even Parliament's legislative supremacy. Their argument is, democracy is the rule of the people, and we represent the people. Just look at the crowds in Ramlila Maidan and you'll understand, as Kiran Bedi memorably said, that "Anna is India and India is Anna!"
Yet, majoritarianism isn't democracy, but Right-wing authoritarianism. It's equally dangerous to pass off highly coercive fast-unto-death as normal democratic protest.
The government capitulated to the Hazare campaign, as it always does, when faced with a movement with an elite character.
The movement attracted ordinary people's support because of revulsion against corruption, not informed agreement with the Jan Lokpal Bill. But the original campaign, launched in April, was Facebook- and Twitter-driven. It mobilised upper middle class people by using free missed calls to have them answered. A telecom company provided the technology, and somebody paid for the 13 million calls answered. by August 15.
The middle-class has dictated terms to the government on many issues: exchanging terrorists for civilian hostages on the IC-814 flight hijacked to Kandahar in 1999, and getting affirmative action diluted in the 2000s through groups like Youth for Equality.
The agitation against affirmative action was driven by hatred of the "low" castes. The present campaign is motivated by disdain for democratic politics. But there's continuity between the two. That's one reason why Dalits, low-caste Hindus, and large numbers of Muslims are cold towards Anna's movement.
Anna has repeatedly said that democratic politics is itself corrupt. He doesn't believe in elections because people "vote under the influence of Rs.100 or a bottle of liquor …." This cynical view shows utter contempt for the Indian people who have repeatedly punished corrupt or under-performing politicians through elections.
There's a difference, though. The elite strata which have planned and lead the core of this agitation have a specifically corporate character. They are all products of post-1991 neoliberal policies and belong to new service-sector businesses like IT. These strata worship their CEOs and have no exposure whatever to ordinary people. They love media-driven spectacles akin to the World Cup, including Anna's fast.
There has also been corporate funding of the Jan Lokpal movement. NGOs run by Anna's close supporters have received millions of dollars in corporate and Ford Foundation donations.
This past January, 14 industrialists wrote a letter to Prime Minister Singh complaining of a "governance deficit," and demanding an anti-corruption ombudsman. Since then, London-based SP Hinduja (God bless his pure soul!) has held forth on the need for a Lokpal. Strongly pro-corporate media groups lead Anna's campaign.
It's as if a large chunk of businessmen had decided to ditch the Congress-led UPA government because it's not delivering "second generation" neoliberal policies like reckless privatisation and dismantlement of labour protection. Many industrialists are perhaps suspicious of Congress president Sonia Gandhi's mildly Left-of-centre political bent and her inaccessibility. They prefer the Bharatiya Janata Party.
This fits in with the involvement of Hindutva forces in the Hazare campaign, frankly admitted by Sushma Swaraj in Parliament on August 17, confirmed by the BJP president's letter supporting Anna, and reinforced by RSS pracharak-ideologue KN Govindacharya'' August 26 statement confirming deep RSS involvement.
The RSS has long tried to tap into popular sentiment against corruption. Three years ago, it roped in Anna and Baba Ramdev. It set up the communal Bharat Swabhiman Trust with Ramdev.
Ramdev's network logistically sustained IAC through Anna's Jantar Mantar fast in April. However, Ramdev's own fast following Anna's, proved an embarrassment and the RSS zeroed in exclusively on Anna.
A movement of which Anna is the figurehead, but which is controlled externally and clandestinely, has the potential to destabilise the government from the Right. This doesn't bode well for democracy.
Comments