Skip to main content

The right to recall legislators (Hindu.)

It must coexist with the right to vote in order to deepen our democratic roots

“There can be no doubt, that if power is granted to a body of men, called Representatives, they like any other men will use their power not for the advantage of the community but for their own advantage, if they can.”

— James Mill

The ancient Athenians, under their unique democracy, came up with a social custom. Each year, in the sixth or seventh month of their 10-month calendar, all the men were asked in their assembly whether they wished to hold an ostracism. If it was a yes, an ostracism was held two months later, in a reserved section of the local agora. Here, citizens wrote down the names of those they wished to be ostracised on shards of pottery, which were then deposited in urns. Officials counted the shards. Whoever had the largest pile of ostraka — the pieces of broken pottery that were used in voting — was banned from the city for 10 years.

Even though such methods lacked due process and the course of justice, many would-be tyrants and individuals accused of corruption were banished this way.

The modern-day right to recall is a direct successor of such methods. A recall election is typically a process by which voters seek to remove elected officials through a direct vote before their term is completed. It has been in place in Canada’s Legislative Assembly of British Columbia since 1995. Voters can petition to have their parliamentary representatives removed from office, even if the MLA is the premier, with a by-election ensuing soon after. In the United States, the states of Alaska, Georgia, Kansas, Minnesota, Montana, Rhode Island and Washington allow for recall on specific grounds such as misconduct or malfeasance.

Its progress in India

This is not a new concept for India. The concept of “Rajdharma”, wherein the lack of effective governance was a cause for removal of a king, has been spoken about since the Vedic times. One of India’s leading humanists, M.N. Roy, proposed, in 1944, a shift to a decentralised and devolved form of governance, allowing for representatives to be elected and recalled. Jayaprakash Narayan, in 1974, spoke extensively on the subject. Section 47 of the Chhattisgarh Nagar Palika Act, 1961, provides for holding of elections to recall elected officials due to non-performance. The Right to Recall also exists at local level bodies in Madhya Pradesh, Bihar and Chhattisgarh. Nearly a decade ago, Lok Sabha Speaker Somnath Chatterjee sought the introduction of a system of a “Right to Recall” of a legislator to ensure accountability. According to a media report of 2011, in Gujarat, the State Election Commission had advised amendments to introduce a right to recall of elected members in municipalities, districts, talukas and village panchayats.

In a first-past-the-post system in a democracy, unfortunately, not every elected representative truly enjoys the mandate of the people. Logic and justice necessitate that if the people have the power to elect their representatives, they should also have the power to remove these representatives when they engage in misdeeds or fail to fulfil their duties. There exists no recourse for the electorate if they are unhappy with their elected representative. The Representation of the People Act, 1951, only provides for “vacation of office upon the commission of certain offences and does not account for general incompetence of the representatives or dissatisfaction of the electorate as a ground for vacation”. However, due care must be taken in the introduction of legislation associated with such laws. California’s gubernatorial recall elections are notorious for the influence of special interests, with Governor Davis’ recall vote, in 2003, a classic example.

Some safeguards
To encourage the process of the right to recall, legislative change is needed which seeks to introduce recall petitions, for elected representatives in the Lok Sabha and in respective Legislative Assemblies. While it is necessary to ensure that a recall process is not frivolous and does not became a source of harassment to elected representatives, the process should have several built-in safeguards such as an initial recall petition to kick-start the process and electronic-based voting to finally decide its outcome. Furthermore, it should ensure that a representative cannot be recalled by a small margin of voters and that the recall procedure truly represents the mandate of the people. To ensure transparency and independence, chief petition officers from within the Election Commission should be designated to supervise and execute the process.

Having such a right offers a mechanism to ensure vertical accountability. Such a right would be a significant check on corruption along with ongoing criminalisation of politics. Numerous studies highlight that “elected representatives who are not up for election behave differently to those who are” — economic growth is typically higher and taxes, spending and borrowing costs are lower under re-election-eligible incumbents than those operating under fixed-term limits.

A free and fair election is a right of the citizens of the country. When their elected representatives no longer enjoy the confidence of the people, the people must have a right to remove them. The true idea of democracy can only be achieved on this edifice of accountability for politicians. Having a process to recall could also limit campaign spending, as morally skewed candidates weigh the risk of being recalled. This right would help engender direct democracy in our country, broadening access and raising inclusiveness. To deepen democracy, the right to recall must be given hand in hand with the right to vote.

Popular posts from this blog

SC asks Centre to strike a balance on Rohingya issue (.hindu)

Supreme Court orally indicates that the government should not deport Rohingya “now” as the Centre prevails over it to not record any such views in its formal order, citing “international ramifications”.

The Supreme Court on Friday came close to ordering the government not to deport the Rohingya.

It finally settled on merely observing that a balance should be struck between humanitarian concern for the community and the country's national security and economic interests.

The court was hearing a bunch of petitions, one filed by persons within the Rohingya community, against a proposed move to deport over 40,000 Rohingya refugees. A three-judge Bench, led by Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra, began by orally indicating that the government should not deport Rohingya “now”, but the government prevailed on the court to not pass any formal order, citing “international ramifications”. With this, the status quo continues even though the court gave the community liberty to approach it in …

Khar’s experimentation with Himalayan nettle brings recognition (downtoearth)

Nature never fails to surprise us. In many parts of the world, natural resources are the only source of livelihood opportunities available to people. They can be in the form of wild shrubs like Daphne papyracea and Daphne bholua (paper plant) that are used to make paper or Gossypium spp (cotton) that forms the backbone of the textile industry.

Nothing can compete with the dynamism of biological resources. Recently, Girardinia diversifolia (Himalayan nettle), a fibre-yielding plant, has become an important livelihood option for people living in the remote mountainous villages of the Hindu Kush Himalaya.

There is a community in Khar, a hamlet in Darchula district in far-western Nepal, which produces fabrics from Himalayan nettle. The fabric and the things made from it are sold in local as well as national and international markets as high-end products.

A Himalayan nettle value chain development initiative implemented by the Kailash Sacred Landscape Conservation and Development Initiati…

India’s criminal wastage: over 10 million works under MGNREGA incomplete or abandoned (hindu)

In the last three and half years, the rate of work completion under the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA) has drastically declined, leading to wastage of public money and leaving villages more prone to drought. This could also be a reason for people moving out of the programme.

At a time when more than one-third of India’s districts are reeling under a drought-like situation due to deficit rainfall, here comes another bad news. The works started under the MGNREGA—close to 80 per cent related to water conservation, irrigation and land development—are increasingly not being completed or in practice, abandoned.

Going by the data (as on October 12) in the Ministry of Rural Development’s website, which tracks progress of MGNREGA through a comprehensive MIS, 10.4 million works have not been completed since April 2014. In the last three and half years, 39.7 million works were started under the programme. Going by the stipulation under the programme, close to 7…