Tuesday, April 25, 2017

VOX POPULI

by

S Kamat
as
Aam Admi

Issue: 198             Date:  24.04.2017

Contents:

1.      No Home Delivery of Petroleum Products
2.      Do Not Make A Mockery of Our Election Process
3.      Sri Sri Ravishankar and the Art of Living Organisation Should Support Rule of Law


No Home Delivery of Petroleum Products

We have another harebrained idea coming out of this BJP government with the Petroleum Minister stating that given the threat of the petrol pump owners to remain shut on Sundays, the authorities would think of home delivery for petrol and diesel. Little does he realise that petroleum products come under the category of flammable products and because of their nature are not allowed to be sold loose except to be filled in vehicles. This being the rule it is a different matter that across India petroleum products are sold loose which is illegal. This however is no reason to consider home delivery for petrol and diesel in these times of terror. We will make it only easier for terrorists to lay their hands on fuel for their incendiary plans. Molotov cocktails - glass bottles filled with petrol lit up and then thrown at the target - will then become the weapon of choice for the terrorists. This BJP government and its Ministers should learn to confront problems directly and not try to work around the situation. Like in this instance if the  petrol pump dealers have a problem with margins deal with it and find a solution rather than go about it obliquely and have a solution that will be a threat to civil society. 


Do Not Make A Mockery of Our Election Process

The recent Srinagar bypoll in which by winning just about 4% of the votes polled of the total of some 7% votes, Farooq Abdullah was declared elected. Not only that the winner preened after the election and when asked about the low turnout, he declared that he could not let down those that came and voted! Is this not a mockery of democracy? When 93% of the electorate failed to turn up and vote for whatever reason should the election not have been declared void? We have quorums for common meetings like that of housing societies, company boards etc. but for elections why is there no stipulation of minimum turnout for the election to be declared valid? We should enact laws that unless there is a turnout of more than 50% an election will be countermanded. This will force not only the candidates to get more and more people to come out and vote and not concentrate just on their vote banks. The Election Commission can also thus work towards more people exercising their franchise. These measures will not only strengthen our democracy but also ensure that it is not reduced to a farce. We already have the EVM's being questioned and there is every likelihood that the Supreme Court will make the paper trail through the VVPAT feature mandatory. Though this is unnecessary, given the present mood of the political parties in objecting to the use of  EVM's, we will have to concede to this request. At this juncture maybe we should question the basic nature of our election process and instead of continuing with the present 'first past the post' principle, meaning whoever gets the majority from the votes polled is declared the winner to 'proportionate representation' where the winner is declared only if he or she gets more than 50% of the votes polled in iterative rounds of polls in the constituency. The multiple polls in each constituency are feasible now with the use of EVM's which drastically reduce the cost of holding elections. This will take care of another farce that we have in our election process like in the recent UP Assembly elections the BJP polled about 40% of the 64% voter turnout which means that they just got 25% of the people in the constituencies to vote for them. Thus the whopping majority of 75% of the people either did not vote for them or did not vote at all. But inspite of that we saw that the BJP had a landslide victory. If you put this up to our politicians they will shrug their shoulders and say that it is the present system and we are playing the game according to that. This is similar to what Farooq Abdullah as stated above, who did not want to 'let down the people' who had voted for him! While in the 'proportionate representation' system at least more than 50% of the people voting would have selected the winning candidate for an election that is valid only if more than 50% of the voters in the constituency have voted. We can make the election system better and truly representative in addition to the above by making voting compulsory and taking a decision on the funding of candidates who stand for elections.

Sri Sri Ravishankar and the Art of Living Organisation Should Support Rule of Law

The tirade that Sri Sri Ravishankar has launched against the National Green Tribunal (NGT) on the function that his organisation, the Art of Living, held on the banks of the River Yamuna at Delhi and for which they were initially fined Rs 5 crores and then now a Committee of Enquiry has found further damage and increased the fine to which the esteemed Sri Sri Ravishankar is objecting very vociferously with language bordering on the intemperate. First things first, this man claims religious persuasion through which he commands a considerable following. Has he thought about the impact of his tirade on his flock which surely must be more than upset with such an outburst? Secondly, he is a citizen of this country and an esteemed one at that. This breeds an expectation that he should respect the law of the land and in that process accept the judgments of authorised bodies and institutions which he encounters in the process of doing his work or that of his organisation. What example is this man setting for not only his flock but the rest of the country in not accepting the due process of law? Thirdly, he is trying to challenge the NGT by throwing his weight around both directly and indirectly which has been seen from the beginning when the issue of the environmental clearance for the function was sought. The Art of Living organisation needs to explain in the context of Sri Sri Ravishankar's claim now as to why they went ahead with making arrangements for the structures and other needs at the function site even before getting the clearance from the NGT. It was for this reason that the NGT when they gave clearance asked the Art of Living organisation to deposit the Rs. 5 crores as a fund for contingent damage to the site. Now Sri Sri Ravishankar argues that the NGT could have stopped the function if they were so particular to save the river. This is rather surprising since where he should be grateful to the NGT for not coming in the way of holding the function in the context of many of the arrangements having been already made, he is questioning them as to why the clearance was given? The indirect pressure that Sri Sri Ravishankar tried to bring on NGT was to get the Prime Minister to come for the inaugural function and spend a few hours there. It is to NGT's credit that they did not cow down to these pressures and upheld their mandate. Fourthly, the NGT has gone about handling this issue very democratically and in the proper manner by giving the Art of Living organisation due opportunity to contest the decision and upon seeing the intensity of the objections referred the matter to an independent and impartial Committee which has now come to a decision. It is expected therefore that Sri Sri Ravishankar and the Art of Living organisation should be graceful and accept the decisions of the NGT in this matter. This will not only be in the interest of the public good apart from the good of the credibility and image of Sri Sri Ravishankar and the Art of Living organisation while upholding the position of the democratic institutions of this country.


*******************************

No comments:

Post a Comment