CHAPTER I

Democracy
in the
Contemporary
World

OVERVIEW
This book is about democracy. In this first chapter we see how democracy
has expanded during the last hundred years to more and more countries
in the world. More than half of the independent countries in the world
today are democracies. The expansion of democracy has not been smooth
and straight. It has seen several ups and downs in different countries. It
still remains an unstable and uncertain achievement.
This chapter begins with different stories on the making and unmaking
of democracy from different parts of the world. These stories are meant to
give a sense of what it means to experience democracy and its absence.
We present the pattern of the spread of democracy first with a series of
maps and then with a short history. The focus in this chapter is on
democracy within a country. But towards the end of the chapter, we take
a look at democracy or its absence in the relations among different
countries. We examine the working of some international organisations.
This allows us to ask a big question: are we moving towards democracy at
the global level?
2

DEMOCRATIC POLITICS

La Nacin

President Salvador Allende

(wearing a helmet) and his
security guards in front of
La Moneda, Chiles
Presidential Palace, on 11
September 1973, hours
before his death. What do
you read on everyones
face in this photograph?

Why did President

Allende address
himself mainly to
workers? Why
were the rich
unhappy with him?

1.1 TWO TALES OF DEMOCRACY

Workers of my country, I have faith in
Chile and its future. Other men will
overcome this dark and bitter moment
when treason seeks to prevail. Keep in
mind that, much sooner than later, the
great avenues will again be opened,
through which will pass free men to
construct a better society. Long live
Chile! Long live the people! Long live the
workers!
These are my last words, and I am
certain that my sacrifice will not be in
vain. I am certain that, at the very least,
it will be a moral lesson that will punish
felony, cowardice, and treason.

These are some extracts from the

last speech of Salvador Allende
(pronounced Ayen-they). He was
then the President of Chile, a
country in South America. The
speech was given on the morning of
11 September 1973, the day his
government was overthrown by the
military. Allende was the founder
DEMOCRACY

IN THE

leader of the Socialist Party of Chile

and led the Popular Unity coalition
to victory in the presidential
election in 1970. After being
elected the President, Allende had
taken several policy decisions to help
the poor and the workers. These
included reform of the educational
system, free milk for children and
redistribution of land to the landless
farmers. He was opposed to foreign
companies taking away natural
resources like copper from the
country. The landlords, the rich and
the Church opposed his policies.
Some other political parties in Chile
also opposed his government.

M ilitar
oup of 1973
ilitaryy CCoup

On the morning of 11 September

1973, the military took over the
seaport. The Defence Minister was
arrested by the military when he
arrived at his office. The military

CONTEMPORARY WORLD

military officers. They could do as

they wished and no one could
question them. Thus a military
dictatorship was established in
Chile. Pinochets government
tortured and killed several of those
who supported Allende and those
who wanted democracy to be
restored. These included General
Alberto Bachelet of the Chilean Air
Force and many other officers who
refused to join the coup. General
Bachelets wife and daughter were
put in prison and tortured. More
than 3,000 people were killed by the
military. Many more were reported
missing. No one knows what
happened to them.

Did the army have

any legal right to
arrest the defence
minister of the
country? Should
the army have the
power to arrest any
citizen?

A C T I V I T Y
Locate and shade Chile on the map. Which
state in our country has a shape similar to
Chile?
Follow the newspaper for one month and collect
news items related to any country in Latin
America. Did you find the news coverage
adequate?

President Michelle Bachelet

addressing her supporters
after her victory in the
presidential election in
January 2006. From this
photograph do you notice
any difference between an
election rally in Chile and in
India?
La Nacin, Chile

commanders asked the President to

resign. Allende refused to resign or
leave the country. But realising the
danger to the country and to his life,
he addressed the people on the
radio, part of which we read in the
beginning. Then the military
surrounded the Presidents house
and started bombing it. President
Allende died in the military attack.
This was the sacrifice he was talking
about in his last speech. A
government elected by people was
overthrown by the military through
conspiracy and violence.
What took place in Chile on 11
September 1973 was a military
coup. General Augusto Pinochet
(pronounced Pinoshe), an Army
general, led the coup. The
government of the United States of
America was unhappy with Allendes
rule and is known to have supported
and funded activities that led to the
coup. Pinochet became the
President of the country and ruled
it for the next 17 years. From a
government that was elected by the
people, the power shifted to the

DEMOCRATIC POLITICS

Lech Walesa
Poland is famous for its
poster art. Most of the
posters of Solidarity carried
this special way of writing
Solidarnosc. Can you find
similar examples of poster
art or wall writing in Indian
politics?

R est
emocr
estoo rraa tion of D
Democr
emocraa ccyy

Pinochets military dictatorship

came to an end after he decided to
hold a referendum in 1988. He felt
confident that in this referendum,
the people would say yes to his
continuing in power. But the people
of Chile had not forgotten their
democratic traditions. Their vote was
a decisive no to Pinochet. This led
to Pinochet losing first his political
and then his military powers. The
hope Allende expressed in his last
address was realised: felony,
cowardice and treason were finally
punished. Political freedom was
restored. Since then Chile has held
four presidential elections in which
different political parties have
participated. Slowly, the armys role
in the countrys government has
been eliminated. The elected
governments that came to power
ordered inquiries into Pinochets
rule. These inquiries showed that his
government was not only very
brutal, but also very corrupt.
Do you remember a little reference
made earlier to General Bachelets
daughter who was imprisoned and
tortured along with her mother?
That girl, Michelle Bachelet
(pronounced Mishel Bashelet), was
elected President of Chile in January
2006. A medical doctor and a
moderate socialist, Michelle became
the first woman to be a Defence
Minister in Latin America. In the
presidential elections she defeated
DEMOCRACY

IN THE

one of Chiles richest men. In this

photograph of her victory speech,
she is saying to her supporters:
Because I was the victim of hatred, I
have dedicated my life to reverse that
hatred and turn it into understanding,
tolerance and why not say it into
love.

D emocr
oland
emocraa ccyy in PPoland

Let us turn to another event, this

time from Poland, in 1980. At that
time Poland was ruled by the Polish
United Workers Party. This was one
of the many communist parties that
ruled in several countries of East
Europe at that time. In these
countries no other political party
was allowed to function. The people
could not freely choose the leaders
of the communist party or the
government. Those who spoke
against the leaders or the party or
the government were put in prison.
The government in Poland was
supported and controlled by the
government of the Soviet Union
(USSR), a vast and powerful
communist state.
On 14 August 1980, the workers
of Lenin Shipyard in the city of
Gdansk went on a strike. The
shipyard was owned by the
government. In fact all the factories
and big property in Poland were
owned by the government. The
strike began with a demand to take
back a crane operator, a woman
worker, who was unjustly dismissed

CONTEMPORARY WORLD

from service. This strike was illegal,

because trade unions independent
of the ruling party were not allowed
in Poland. As the strike continued,
a former electrician of the shipyard,
Lech Walesa (pronounced Lek
Walesha), joined the strikers. He was
dismissed from service in 1976 for
demanding higher pay. Walesa soon
emerged as the leader of the striking
workers. The strike began to spread
across the whole city. Now the
workers started raising larger
demands. They wanted the right to
form independent trade unions. They
also demanded the release of political
prisoners and an end to censorship
on press.
The movement became so popular
that the government had to give in.
The workers led by Walesa signed a
21-point agreement with the
government that ended their strike.
The government agreed to recognise
the workers right to form
independent trade unions and their
right to strike. After the Gdansk
agreement was signed, a new trade
union called Solidarity (Solidarnosc
in Polish) was formed. It was the first
time an independent trade union
was formed in any of the communist
states. Within a year, Solidarity
swept across Poland and had about
one crore members. Revelations of
widespread
corruption
and
mismanagement in the government
made matters worse for the
rulers. The government, led by
General Jaruzelski, grew anxious
and imposed martial law in
December 1981. Thousands of
Solidarity members were put in
prison. Freedom to organise, protest
and express opinions was once
again taken away.
Another wave of strikes, again
organised by Solidarity, began in
1988. This time the Polish
6

government was weaker, the

support from Soviet Union uncertain
and the economy was in decline.
Another round of negotiations with
Walesa resulted in an agreement in
April 1989 for free elections. Solidarity
contested all the 100 seats of the
Senate and won 99 of them. In
October 1990, Poland had its first
presidential elections in which more
than one party could contest. Walesa
was elected President of Poland.

A C T I V I T Y
Locate Poland on the map. Write down the
names of the countries that surround it.
Which other East European countries were
ruled by communist parties in the 1980s?
Shade them on the map.
Make a list of political activities that you could
not have done in Poland in 1980s but you can
do in our country.

Tw o FFee aatur
tur
es of D
emocr
tures
Democr
emocraa ccyy

We have read two different kinds of

real life stories. The story from Chile
was of a democratic government led
by Allende being replaced by a nondemocratic military government of
Pinochet, followed by restoration of
democracy. In Poland we tracked the
transition from a non-democratic
government to a democratic
government.
Let us compare the two nondemocratic governments in these
stories. There were many differences
between Pinochets rule in Chile and
the communist rule in Poland. Chile
was ruled by a military dictator,
while Poland was ruled by a political
party. The government of Poland
claimed that it was ruling on behalf
of the working classes. Pinochet
made no such claim and openly
favoured big capitalists. Yet both
had some common features:
DEMOCRATIC POLITICS

Why was an
independent trade
union so important
in Poland? Why are
trade unions
necessary?

 The

people could not choose or

change their rulers.
There was no real freedom to
express ones opinions, form
political associations and organise
protests and political action.
The three democratic governments
identified above Allendes Chile,
Walesas Poland and Bachelets
Chile are different in their approach
towards social and economic matters.
Allende preferred government control
on all big industries and the
economy. Walesa wanted the market
to be free of government interference.
Bachelet stands somewhere in the
middle on this issue. Yet these three
governments shared some basic
features. Power was exercised by

CHECK
YOUR
PROGRESS

governments elected by the people

and not by the army, unelected
leaders or any external power. The
people enjoyed some basic political
freedoms.
From these two stories let us draw
a rough way to identify a democracy.
Democracy is a form of government
that allows people to choose their
rulers. In a democracy:
only leaders elected by people
should rule the country, and
people have the freedom to express
views, freedom to organise and
freedom to protest.
We shall come back to this question
in Chapter Two and develop a
definition of democracy. We shall also
note some features of a democracy.

Anita made a list of the features of all the five governments that we have discussed so far. But somehow
the list got mixed up. Now she has a list of many features but she does not remember which feature
applies to which government. Can you help her by writing the correct feature under the name of the
government in the table below? Remember, some of these features may apply to more than one
government and would need to be written separately under each of these.
Features:

Military
di
e
ctatorship Widespread
h
t
The president
sm of
Critici ent not
corruption
was once a
m
er
govern
political prison
d
Government
allowe
Ruler elected owned all
Ruler not
by the people industries More than o
ne elected by the
party ex
is
people
Missing people
ts
People enjoyed
Foreign
basic political
in
tervention
s
freedom
domestic a in
ffairs

Chile
Allende

DEMOCRACY

Chile
Pinochet

IN THE

Chile
Bachelet

CONTEMPORARY WORLD

Poland
Jaruzelski

Poland
Walesa

1.2 THE CHANGING MAP

Twentieth century was full of the
kind of stories we have read above:
stories of transition to democracy,
of challenges to democracy, of
military coups, of struggles of the
people to bring back democracy.
Was there a pattern to these stories
that record both the march towards
democracy and the setbacks to
democracy? Let us use the basic
features we noted earlier and
identify democracies among
different countries of the world.
This is what the three maps shown
here do. Take a look at these three
maps below and find out if there was
a pattern in the way democracies
have evolved in the twentieth century.
The first map depicts the countries

OF

DEMOCRACY

that were democratic in 1950, a few

years after the end of the Second
World War. This map also shows
countries from this set that had
already become democratic by 1900.
The second map presents a picture
of democratic regimes in 1975, after
most of the colonies had gained
independence. Finally, we take
another leap and look at democracies
in the year 2000, at the beginning of
the twenty-first century.
As we look at these maps, let us
ask ourselves some questions. How
has democracy marched through
the twentieth century? Is there a
clear pattern of expansion? When
did the expansion take place? In
which regions?

MAP 1.1: DEMOCRATIC GOVERNMENTS IN 1900-1950

DEMOCRATIC GOVERNMENT IN 1900 AND 1950

DEMOCRATIC GOVERNMENT IN 1950 BUT NOT IN 1900

DEMOCRATIC POLITICS

MAP 1.2: DEMOCRATIC GOVERNMENTS IN 1975

DEMOCRATIC GOVERNMENT IN 1975

MAP 1.3: DEMOCRATIC GOVERNMENTS IN 2000

DEMOCRATIC GOVERNMENT IN 2000

Source: Historical data for these maps is taken from Polity IV Project dataset of Universtiy of Maryland. This dataset defines democracy as existence
of choices about policies and leaders, checks on executive power and guarantee of civil liberties. Here we have used positive Polity scores as
indicating the existence of democracy. In some cases the scores of dataset have been modified. For details see http://www.cidcm.umd.edu

DEMOCRACY

IN THE

CONTEMPORARY WORLD

On the basis of these maps identify up to three countries (in some cases you wont find three countries) that
were democratic in these continents for the given years and make a table as given below.
Year
1950
1975
2000

Africa

Asia

Europe

Latin America

CHECK
YOUR
PROGRESS

Identify some countries from map 1.1 that became democratic between 1900 and 1950.
Identify some countries from map 1.1 and 1.2 that were democratic in 1950 and 1975.
Identify some European countries from map 1.2 and 1.3 that were democratic in 1975 and 2000.
Identify some countries in Latin America that became democratic after 1975.
Make a list of big countries that were not democratic in 2000.

Let us summarise the main points

that emerge from a reading of these
maps. You need to go back to the
maps to answer the question that
comes after each point.
Democracy
has expanded
throughout the twentieth
century. Is it correct to say that
at each point in these maps, the
number of democratic countries is
larger than at the previous point
in time?
Democracy did not spread
evenly in all parts of the world.

It was established first in some

regions and then spread to other
regions. Which continents in the
world had a large number of
democracies in 1900 and 1950?
And which continents did not have
almost any?
While a majority of countries are
democratic today, there are still
large parts of the world that are
not democratic. Which regions in
the world account for most of the
countries
that
were
not
democracies in 2000?

1.3 PHASES IN THE EXPANSION

OF DEMOCRACY
The Beginning

These maps do not tell us much

about what happened before the
twentieth century. The story of modern democracy began at least two
centuries ago. You may have read
the chapter on the French Revolution of 1789 in the history book of
this course. This popular uprising
did not establish a secure and stable
democracy in France. Throughout
the nineteenth century, democracy
in France was overthrown and restored several times. Yet the French
Revolution inspired many struggles
for democracy all over Europe.

10

In Britain, the progress towards

democracy started much before the
French Revolution. But the progress
was very slow. Through the
eighteenth and the nineteenth
centuries, series of political events
reduced the power of monarchy and
feudal lords. The right to vote was
granted to more and more people.
Around the same time as the French
Revolution, the British colonies in
North America declared themselves
independent in 1776. In the next few
years these colonies came together
to form the United States of America.
They adopted a democratic

DEMOCRATIC POLITICS

Looking at these
maps, which period
do you find most
important in the
expansion of
democracy? Why?

Why were women

given voting rights
much later than
men in most
countries? Why did
this not happen in
India?

constitution in 1787. But here too

the right to vote was limited to very
few men.
In the nineteenth century struggles
for democracy often centred round
political equality, freedom and justice.
One major demand was the right for
every adult citizen to vote. Many
European countries that were
becoming more democratic did not
initially allow all people to vote. In
some countries only people owning
property had the right to vote. Often
women did not have the right to vote.
In the United States of America, the
blacks all over the country could not
exercise the right to vote until 1965.
Those struggling for democracy
wanted this right granted
universally to all adults men or
women, rich or poor, white or black.
This is called universal adult
franchise or universal suffrage. The
box here tells us when universal
suffrage was granted in many
countries of the world.

When was universal

adult franchise granted?

Note: This is only an

illustrative list from different
parts of the world. The year
indicates when the principle
of one person one vote was
fully realised in that
country. The list does not
include those cases where
the right to vote was
withdrawn later.

1893
1917
1918
1919
1928
1931
1934
1944
1945
1950
1951
1952
1955
1962
1965
1978
1994

DEMOCRACY

New Zealand
Russia
Germany
Netherlands
Britain
Sri Lanka
Turkey
France
Japan
India
Argentina
Greece
Malaysia
Australia
US
Spain
South Africa

IN THE

As you can see, by 1900 New

Zealand was the only country where
every adult had voting right. But if
you go back to the map, you can see
many other countries are marked as
democracies by the beginning of the
twentieth century. These countries
had by then governments elected by
a significant number of people,
mostly men, and had granted
political freedom in some measure.
Early democracies were established
in Europe, North America and Latin
America.

E nd of CColonialism
olonialism

For a very long time most countries

in Asia and Africa were colonies
under the control of European
nations. People of the colonised
countries had to wage struggles to
achieve independence. They not only
wanted to get rid of their colonial
masters, but also wished to choose
their future leaders. Our country
was one of the few colonies where
people carried a nationalist struggle
to liberate the country from the
colonial rule. Many of these
countries became democracies
immediately after the end of the
Second World War in 1945. India
achieved Independence in 1947 and
embarked on its journey to transform
itself from a subject country to a
democracy. It continues to be a
democracy. Most former colonies did
not have such a good experience.
The case of Ghana, a country in
western Africa, illustrates the more
common experience of former
colonies. Ghana used to be a British
colony named Gold Coast. It became
independent in 1957. It was among
the first countries in Africa to gain
independence. It inspired other
African countries to struggle for
freedom.
Kwame
Nkrumah
(pronounced Enkruma), son of a

CONTEMPORARY WORLD

11

A C T I V I T Y
Locate Ghana in an atlas and then spot it in the
three maps in the previous section. Was Ghana
a democracy in 2000?
Do you think it is good to elect someone
President for life? Or is it better to hold regular
elections after every few years?

R e c e nntt phase

The next big push towards democracy

came after 1980, as democracy was
revived in several countries of Latin
America. The disintegration of the
Soviet Union accelerated this process.
From the story of Poland we know
that the then Soviet Union controlled
many of its neighbouring communist
countries in Eastern Europe. Poland
and several other countries became
free from the control of the Soviet
Union during 1989-90. They chose
to become democracies. Finally the
Soviet Union itself broke down in
1991. The Soviet Union comprised 15
Republics. All the constituent
Republics emerged as independent
countries. Most of them became
democracies. Thus the end of Soviet
control on East Europe and the break
up of the Soviet Union led to a big
12

change in the political map of the

world.
In this period major changes also
took place in Indias neighbourhood.
Pakistan and Bangladesh made a
transition from army rule to
democracy in 1990s. In Nepal, the
king gave up many of his powers to
become a constitutional monarch to
be guided by elected leaders.
However, these changes were not
permanent. In 1999 General
Musharraf brought back army rule
in Pakistan. In 2005 the new king
of Nepal dismissed the elected
government and took back political
freedoms that people had won in the
previous decade.
Yet the overall trend in this period
points to more and more countries
turning to democracy. This phase
still continues. By 2005, about 140
countries were holding multi-party
elections. This number was higher
than ever before. More than 80
previously non-democratic countries
have made significant advances
towards democracy since 1980. But,
even today, there are many
countries where people cannot
express their opinion freely. They

Kwame Nkrumah Memorial

Park in Accra, the capital of
Ghana. This park was
commissioned in 1992,
twenty years after Nkrumah
passed away. What might
have caused this delay?

Dev Ley, Wikipedia, GNU Free Documentation License

goldsmith and himself a teacher,

was active in the independence
struggle of his country.
After independence, Nkrumah became the first prime minister and
then the president of Ghana. He was
a friend of Jawaharlal Nehru and an
inspiration for democrats in Africa.
But unlike Nehru, he got himself
elected president for life. Soon after, in 1966, he was overthrown by
the military. Like Ghana, most countries that became democracies after
gaining independence had a mixed
record. They could not remain democracies for long.

DEMOCRATIC POLITICS

This cartoon
appeared in 2005
when Aung San Suu
Kyi turned 60. What is
the cartoonist saying
here? Will the army
rulers feel happy with
this cartoon?

What should be the

policy of the
government of
India towards the
military rulers of
Myanmar?

Stephane Peray, Thailand, Cagle Cartoons Inc.

read
the
cartoon

still cannot elect their leaders. They

cannot take big decisions about their
present and future life.
One such country is Myanmar,
previously known as Burma. It
gained freedom from colonial rule in
1948 and became a democracy. But
the democratic rule ended in 1962
with a military coup. In 1990
elections were held for the first time
after almost 30 years. The National
League for Democracy, led by Aung
San Suu Kyi (pronounced Soo-chi),
won the election. But the military
leaders of Myanmar refused to step
down and did not recognise the
election results. Instead, the military
put the elected pro-democracy
leaders, including Suu Kyi, under
house arrest. Political activists
accused of even the most trivial
offences have been jailed. Anyone
caught publicly airing views or
issuing statements critical of the
regime can be sentenced up to
twenty years in prison. Due to the
coercive policies of the military-ruled
DEMOCRACY

IN THE

government in Myanmar, about 6 to

10 lakh people in that country have
been uprooted from their homes and
have taken shelter elsewhere.
Despite being under house arrest,
Suu Kyi continued to campaign for
democracy. According to her: The
quest for democracy in Burma is the
struggle of the people to live whole,
meaningful lives as free and equal
members of the world community. Her

struggle has won international

recognition. She has also been
awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. Yet
the people in Myanmar are still
struggling to establish a democratic
government in their country.

A C T I V I T Y
Locate

Myanmar on an atlas. Which Indian

states border this country?
Write a short essay on the life of Aung San
Suu Kyi.
Collect newspaper reports on the struggle for
democracy in Myanmar.

CONTEMPORARY WORLD

13

After reading about the various

phases of expansion of democracy,
a teacher, Mr. Singh, asked the
students to summarise what they
had learnt. This is how the
conversation took place:
Farida: We have learnt that democracy has been
expanding to more and more regions and
countries all over the world.
Rajesh: Yes, we live in a better world than before.
It seems we are moving towards a world
democracy.
Sushmita: World democracy! How can you say
that? I saw a television programme that showed
how the Americans invaded Iraq without any
justification. The people of Iraq were not
consulted at any stage. How can you call that
a world democracy?
Farida: I am not talking about the relationship
between different countries. I am only saying
that more and more countries are becoming
democratic.
Rajesh: But what is the difference between the
two? If more and more countries become
democratic, isnt it obvious that the world also
becomes more democratic? After all the Iraq
war was all about taking democracy to that
country.
Sushmita: No, it is not obvious to me.
Singh sir: I think we are talking about two very
different things here. Farida spoke about
establishment of democratic governments within
different countries in the world today. Sushmita
and Rajesh have differences over something else.
Their difference is over the relationship among
different countries. It is quite possible, Rajesh,
that the rulers of a country who are
democratically elected by their people may want
to dominate over other countries.
Sushmita: Yes sir. That is exactly what happened
in the case of the war on Iraq.
Surinder: I am confused. How can we talk about
democracy at the global level? Is there any
world government? Who is the president of the
world? If there is no government, how can it
be democratic or non-democratic?

14

GLOBAL LEVEL?
International Organisations
Let us respond to the question that
came up in this conversation: Does
an increase in the number of
democratic countries all over the
world automatically lead to
democratic relations among
countries? Before we do that, let us
think about the point raised by
Surinder. There is a government of
India, a government of the United
States of America, and so on. But
there is no government of the world.
No government can pass any law
that will apply to all the people of
the world. If there is no such
government, if there are no rulers
and ruled, how can we apply the two
features of democracy here? These
two features, you would recall, were
that the rulers should be elected by
the people and that people should
have basic political freedoms.

Should there be a
world government?
If yes, who should
elect it? And, what
powers should it
have?

Universal,Mexico, Cagle Cartoons Inc.

AT THE

Angel Boligan,

1. 4 DEMOCRACY

DEMOCRATIC POLITICS

This cartoon was published

in Mexico in 2005 and was
titled International Games.
Which games is the
cartoonist talking about
here? What does the ball
symbolize? Who are the
players?

Should the
permanent
members of the
UN be given the
power to veto?

While Surinder is right in a simple

sense, we cannot say that the
question of democracy does not arise
here. There is no single World
Government, but there are many
institutions in the world that
perform partially the functions of
such a government. These
organisations cannot command
countries and citizens in a way a
government can, but they do make
rules that put limits on what
governments can do. Consider these
points:
Who makes laws and rules to
govern the seas that do not fall
within the boundaries of any one
country? Or who takes steps to
control environmental degradation
that threatens all the countries
together. The United Nations (UN)
has evolved many Conventions on
these questions that are now
binding on most countries of the
world. The UN is a global
association of nations of the world
to
help
cooperation
in
international law, security,
economic development and social
equity. The UN Secretary General
is its chief administrative officer.
What happens when a country
attacks another country in an
unjust manner? The UN Security
Council, an organ of the UN, is
responsible for maintaining peace
and security among countries. It
can put together an international
army and take action against the
wrongdoer.
Who lends money to governments
when they need it? The International Monetary Fund (IMF) does
so. The World Bank also gives
loans to the governments. Before
lending they ask the concerned
government to show all its
accounts and direct it to make
changes in its economic policy.
DEMOCRACY

IN THE

Are these decisions

democr
democraa tic?

So, there are many institutions at

the world level that perform some
of the functions that a world
government would perform. But we
need to know just how democratic
these organisations are. The
yardstick here is whether each of
the countries has free and equal
say in the decisions that affect
them. In this light let us examine
the organisation of some of these
world bodies.
Every one of the 193 member
states (as on 1 September 2012)
of the UN has one vote in the UN
General Assembly. It meets in
regular yearly sessions under a
president elected from among the
representatives of the member
countries. General Assembly is like
the parliament where all the
discussion takes place. In that
sense the UN would appear to be a
very democratic organisation. But
the General Assembly cannot take
any decision about what action
should be taken in a conflict
between different countries.
The fifteen-member Security
Council of the UN takes such
crucial decisions. The Council has
five permanent members US,
Russia, UK, France and China. Ten
other members are elected by the
General Assembly for two-year
terms. The real power is with five
permanent
members.
The
permanent members, especially the
US, contribute most of the money
needed for the maintenance of the
UN. Each permanent member has
veto power. It means that the
Council cannot take a decision if
any permanent member says no to
that decision. This system has led
more and more people and
countries to protest and demand
that the UN becomes more
democratic.

CONTEMPORARY WORLD

15

A C T I V I T Y
Find out more about the history and various
organs of the United Nations.
Collect any news about the decisions of the
World Bank and the IMF.

Compare these to the kind of

democratic practices that we have
been discussing in this chapter.
What would you say about a country
where some persons have a
permanent position in the ministry
and have the power to stop the
decision of the entire parliament? Or
a parliament where five per cent of
the members hold a majority of
votes? Would you call these
democratic? Most of the global
institutions fail to pass the simple
test of democracy that we use for
national governments.
If global institutions are not
democratic, are they at least
becoming more democratic than
before? Here too the evidence is not
very encouraging. In fact, while
16

nations are becoming more

democratic than they were earlier,
international organisations are
becoming less democratic. Twenty
years ago there were two big powers
in the world: the US and the Soviet
Union. The competition and conflict
between these two big powers and
their allies kept a certain balance in
all the global organisations. After the
collapse of the Soviet Union, the US
appears to be the only superpower
in the world. This American
dominance affects the working of
international organisations.
This is not to say that there is no
urge or move towards global
democracy. The urge comes from
people who get more opportunities
to come in touch with one another.
Over the last few years the people of
different countries have come
together without their governments
support. They have formed global
organisations against war and
against domination of the world by
a few countries and business
companies. As in the case of
democracy within the nations, the
initiative for democracy among
nations has come from the struggles
of the people.

Wolfowitz was a
senior official in the
Department of
Defence in the US
(commonly called the
Pentagon). He was an
aggressive supporter
of the invasion of Iraq.
The cartoon
comments on his
appointment as the
President of the World
Bank. What does the
cartoon tell us about
the relationship
between the World
Bank and the US?

read
the
cartoon
Patrick Chappatte, International Herald Tribune,
Cagle Cartoons Inc.

International Monetary Fund (IMF)

is one of the biggest moneylenders
for any country in the world. Its 188
member states (as on 1 September
2012) do not have equal voting
rights. The vote of each country is
weighed by how much money it has
contributed to the IMF. More than
52% of the voting power in the IMF
is in the hands of only ten countries
(US, Japan, Germany, France, UK,
China, Italy, Saudi Arabia, Canada
and Russia). The remaining 178
countries have very little say in how
these international organisations take
decisions. The World Bank has a
similar system of voting. The President
of the World Bank has always been a
citizen of the US, conventionally
nominated by the Treasury Secretary
(Finance Minister) of the US
government.

DEMOCRATIC POLITICS

CHECK
YOUR
PROGRESS

Here are some suggestions to strengthen world democracy. Do you support these changes? Are these
changes likely to happen? Give your reasons for each of these.
More nations should become permanent members of the Security Council.
UN General Assembly should become like a world parliament with representatives from each country
in proportion to the population of the country. These representatives should elect a world government.
Individual countries should not have armies. The UN should maintain task forces to bring about
peace in case of conflict between nations.
A UN President should be elected directly by all the people of the world.

Democracy promotion

The cartoon Cactus

of Democracy was
published in 2004.
What does the cactus
look like here? Who is
gifting it, and to
whom? What is the
message?

Stephane Peray, Thailand,

Cagle Cartoons Inc.

read
the
cartoon

Take a close look at the two

cartoons on this and on the next
page. These cartoons raise a
fundamental question related to
global democracy. Recently, many
powerful countries in the world,
particularly the United States of
America, have taken on the task of
democracy promotion in the rest of
the world. They say that propagating
the values of democracy is not
enough. Existing democracies
should directly intervene in
countries that are non-democratic
to establish democracy there. In
some cases powerful countries have
launched armed attack on nondemocratic countries. This is what
Sushmita was talking about.
Let us see what happened in Iraq.
Iraq is a country in Western Asia. It
became independent from British

DEMOCRACY IN THE CONTEMPORARY WORLD

rule in 1932. Three decades later

there were a series of coups by
military officers. Since 1968, it was
ruled by Arab Socialist Bath Party
(the Arabic word Bath means
renaissance). Saddam Hussein, a
leading Bath party leader, played a
key role in the 1968 coup that
brought the party to power. This
government abolished traditional
Islamic law and gave women the
right to vote and several freedoms
not granted in other west Asian
countries. After becoming the
president of Iraq in 1979, Saddam
ran a dictatorial government and
suppressed any dissent or
opposition to his rule. He was known
to have got a number of political
opponents killed and persons of
ethnic minorities massacred.
The US and its allies like Britain,
alleged that Iraq possessed secret
nuclear weapons and other
weapons of mass destruction
which posed a big threat to the
world. But when a UN team went
to Iraq to search for such weapons,
it did not find any. Still the US and
its allies invaded Iraq, occupied it
and removed Saddam Hussein from
power in 2003. The US installed an
interim government of its
preference. The war against Iraq
was not authorised by the UN
Security Council. Kofi Annan, the
UN Secretary General, said that the
US war on Iraq was illegal.

17

A C T I V I T Y

read
the
cartoon

Collect information on the debate related to Iraq

within the US and the UK. What were the reasons
originally offered for the Iraq invasion by the
President of US and the Prime Minister of UK?
What were the reasons offered after the war?

Helping Democracy
was a comment on
the presence of US
forces during the
elections in Iraq. Do
you think the cartoon
can apply to many
other situations?
Identify some
examples from this
chapter which this
cartoon can help
understand.

18

Ares, Caglecartoons.com, Cagle Cartoons Inc.

The example of Iraq raises some

basic questions that we need to
think about:
Is this the right way to promote
democracy? Should a democratic
country wage a war and invade
other countries for establishing
democracy there?
Does external help work in every
case? Or does it work only when
the people of a nation are actively
engaged in a struggle to make their
societies democratic?
Even if external intervention leads
to the establishment of democracy
in a country, would it last long?
Would it enjoy the support of its
citizens?
Finally, is the use of external force
to gift democracy to the people in
keeping with the spirit of
democracy?
Think about these questions in the
light of all that you have learnt in
this chapter.

DEMOCRATIC POLITICS

GLOSSARY

exercises

Censorship: A condition under which the freedom of expression is taken

away. Citizens have to take prior permission from the censor authorities of
the government for making a speech or publishing news and views.
Anything that the government finds objectionable cannot be published.
Coalition: An alliance of people, associations, parties or nations. This alliance
may be temporary or a matter of convenience.
Colony: Territory under the immediate political control of another state.
Communist state: A state governed by a communist party without allowing
other parties to compete for power. The state controls all the big property and
industry.
Coup: A coup dtat (pronounced ku deta), or simply a coup, is the sudden
overthrow of a government illegally. It may or may not be violent in nature.
The term is French for a sudden blow or strike to a state.
Martial law: A system of rules that takes effect when a military authority
takes control of the normal administration of justice.
Political prisoners: Persons held in prison or otherwise detained, perhaps
under house arrest, because a government considers their ideas, image or
activities as a threat to the authority of the state. Often exaggerated or false
cases are foisted on them and they are kept in detention without following
normal law.
Referendum: A direct vote in which an entire electorate is asked to either
accept or reject a particular proposal. This may be adoption of a new
constitution, a law or a specific governmental policy.
State: Political association occupying a definite territory, having an organised
government and possessing power to make domestic and foreign policies.
Governments may change, but the state continues. In common speech, the
terms country, nation and state are used as synonyms.
Strike: Mass refusal by workers or employees to perform work due to certain
grievances or because of demands not met. In most democratic countries the
right to strike is legal.
Trade Union: An association of workers for the purpose of maintaining or
improving the conditions of their employment.
Veto: The right of a person, party or nation to stop a certain decision or law.
The word comes from Latin, which means I forbid. A veto gives unlimited
power to stop a decision, but not to adopt one.
1

Which of the following does not lead to the spread of democracy?

a Struggle by the people
b Invasion by foreign countries
c End of colonialism
d Peoples desire for freedom

Which of the following statements is true about todays world?

a Monarchy as a form of government has vanished .
b The relationship between different countries has become more
democratic than ever before.
c In more and more countries rulers are being elected by the people.
d There are no more military dictators in the world.

DEMOCRACY

IN THE

CONTEMPORARY WORLD

19

exercises

Use one of the following statements to complete the sentence:

Democracy in the international organisations requires that
a The rich countries should have a greater say.
b Countries should have a say according to their military power.
c Countries should be treated with respect in proportion to their
population.
d All countries in the world should be treated equally.

Based on the information given in this chapter, match the following

countries and the path democracy has taken in that country.
a
b
c
d

COUNTRY

PATH TO DEMOCRACY

Chile
Nepal
Poland
Ghana

i
ii
iii
iv

Freedom from British colonial rule

End of military dictatorship
End of one party rule
King agreed to give up his powers

What are the difficulties people face in a non-democratic country?

Give answers drawing from the examples given in this chapter.

Which freedoms are usually taken away when a democracy is

overthrown by the military?

Which of the following positions can contribute to democracy at the

global level? Give reasons for your answer in each case.
a My country gives more money to international institutions.
Therefore, I want to be treated with more respect and exercise
more power.
b My country may be small or poor. But my voice must be heard
with equal respect, because these decisions will affect my country.
c Wealthy nations will have a greater say in international affairs.
They cannot let their interests suffer just because they are
outnumbered by poor nations.
d Big countries like India must have a greater say in international
organisations.

Here are three opinions heard in a television debate on the struggle

for democracy in Nepal. Which of these do you agree with and why?
Guest 1: India is a democracy. Therefore, the Indian government
must support the people of Nepal who are struggling
against monarchy and for democracy.
Guest 2: That is a dangerous argument. We would be in the same
position as the US was in Iraq. Remember, no outside force
can promote democracy.
Guest 3:But why should we bother about the internal affairs of another
country? We should be worried about our business interests
there, not about democracy.

20

DEMOCRATIC POLITICS

exercises

In an imaginary country called Happyland, the people overthrew the

foreign ruler and brought back the old royal family. They said: After
all their ancestors were our kings before foreigners started ruling us. It is good
that we have one strong ruler, who can help us become rich and powerful.

When someone talked about democracy the wise men said it is a

foreign idea. Their struggle was to throw the foreigners and their
ideas out of the country. When someone demanded freedom for the
media, the elders thought that too much criticism of the ruler would
not help them improve their living standards. After all, the king is so
kind and interested in the welfare of all the subjects. Why create problems for
him. Dont we all want to be happy?

After reading the above passage, Chaman, Champa and Chandru

made the following observations:
Chaman: Happyland is a democratic country because people were
able to throw out the foreign rulers and bring back the
king.
Champa: Happyland is not a democratic country because people
cannot criticise the ruler. The king may be nice and may
provide economic prosperity, but a king cannot give a
democratic rule.
Chandru: What people need is happiness. So they are willing to allow
their new ruler to take decisions for them. If people are
happy it must be a democracy.
What is your opinion about each of these statements? What do you
think about the form of government in this country?

Form different groups in your class and collect different types of information
(news clippings, articles, photographs, cartoons, etc.) about struggles for
democracy in any country that is currently not democratic. Focus on the
following questions:
What makes the government non-democratic?
What are the main complaints and demands of the people in that
country?
How do the existing rulers react to peoples demands?
Who are the main leaders of the struggle for democracy?
You could present the information thus collected in various forms: an
exhibition, a collage, a report or a wallpaper.

DEMOCRACY

IN THE

CONTEMPORARY WORLD

21

CHAPTER 2

What is
Democracy?
Why
Democracy?

OVERVIEW
The stories and the analysis in the previous chapter gave us a sense of
what democracy is like. There we described some governments as
democratic and some as non-democratic. We saw how governments in
some of those countries changed from one form to the other. Let us now
draw general lessons from those stories and ask the more basic question:
What is democracy? What are its features? This chapter builds on a simple
definition of democracy. Step by step, we work out the meaning of the
terms involved in this definition. The aim here is to understand clearly the
bare minimum features of a democratic form of government. After going
through this chapter we should be able to distinguish a democratic form
of government from a non-democratic government. Towards the end of
this chapter, we step beyond this minimal objective and introduce a broader
idea of democracy.
In the previous chapter, we have seen that democracy is the most
prevalent form of government in the world today and it is expanding to
more countries. But why is it so? What makes it better than other forms of
government? That is the second big question that we take up in this chapter.
22

DEMOCRATIC POLITICS

2.1 WHAT

IS

DEMOCRACY?

In Chapter One we read many stories

from different parts of the world.
Through these stories we discussed
various
governments
and
organisations. We called some of
these democracies. Others were
described as non-democracies. Can
you recall, for each of these countries,
something about the governments
that were described as democracies?
Chile, before and after Pinochets
rule
Poland, after the fall of communist
rule
Ghana, in the early period of
Nkrumahs government
What do you think is common to
them? Why do we club them all under
the label of democracy? What is it that

distinguishes these governments

from Pinochets rule in Chile,
communist rule in Poland or the later
period of Nkrumahs rule in Ghana?
What do these governments have in
common with the military rule in
Myanmar? Why do we say that these
governments are not democratic?
On the basis of this analysis, write
down some common features of:
Democratic governments
Non-democratic governments

W h y def
ine democr
define
democraa ccyy ?

Before we proceed further, let us

first take note of an objection by
Merry. She does not like this way
of defining democracy and wants
to ask some basic questions.

News items like this appear very often in newspapers.

Do they all use the word democracy in the same sense?
WHAT

IS

DEMOCRACY? WHY DEMOCRACY?

23

Her teacher Matilda Lyngdoh

responds to her questions, as other
classmates join the discussion:
Merry: Maam, I dont like this idea. First we
spend one whole chapter discussing democracies in different parts of the world and then
we want to find out the meaning of democracy. I mean logically shouldnt we have approached it the other way round? Shouldnt the
meaning have come first and then the example?
Lyngdoh Madam: I can see your point. But that
is not how we reason in everyday life. We use
words like pen, rain or love. Do we wait to have
a definition of these words before we use
them? Come to think of it, do we have clear
definition of these words? It is only by using a
word that we understand its meaning.
Merry: But then why do we need definitions at all?
Lyngdoh Madam: We need a definition only when
we come across a difficulty in the use of a word.
We need a definition of rain only when we wish
to distinguish it from, say, drizzle or cloudburst.
The same is true for democracy. We need a clear
definition only because people use it for different purposes, because very different kinds of
governments call themselves democracy.
Ribiang: But why do we need to work on a definition? The other day you quoted Abraham Lincoln to us: Democracy is government of the
people, by the people and for the people. We in
Meghalaya always ruled ourselves. That is accepted by everyone. Why do we need to change
that?
Lyngdoh Madam: I am not saying we need to
change it. I too find this definition very beautiful. But we dont know if this is the best way of
defining unless we think about it ourselves. We
must not accept something just because it is
famous, just because everyone accepts it.
Yolanda: Maam, can I suggest something? We
dont need to look for any definition. I read somewhere that the word democracy comes from a
Greek word Demokratia. In Greek demos
means people and kratia means rule. So democracy is rule by the people. This is the correct meaning. Where is the need to debate?
Lyngdoh Madam: That is also a very helpful way
of thinking about this matter. I would just say
that this does not always work. A word does
24

not remain tied to its origin. Just think of computers. Originally they were used for computing, that
is to say calculating, very difficult mathematical
sums. These were very powerful calculators. But
nowadays very few people use computers for
computing sums. They use it for writing, for designing, for listening to music and for watching
films. Words remain the same but their meaning
can change with time. In that case it is not very
useful to look at the origins of a word.
Merry: Maam, so basically what you are saying
is that there is no shortcut to our thinking about
the matter ourselves. We have to think about
its meaning and evolve a definition.
Lyngdoh Madam: You got me right. Let us get on
with it now.

A C T I V I T Y
Let us take Lyngdoh Madam seriously and try to
write down the exact definition of some of the
simple words that we use all the time: pen, rain
and love. For example, is there a way of defining
a pen that distinguishes it clearly from a pencil, a
brush, a chalk or crayon.
What have you learnt from this attempt?
What does it teach us about understanding the
meaning of democracy?

A simple def
inition
definition

Let us get back to our discussion

on similarities and differences
among governments that are called
democracies. In the previous chapter
we identified one simple factor
common to all democracies: the
government is chosen by the people.
We could thus start with a simple
definition: democracy is a form of
government in which the rulers
are elected by the people.
This is a useful starting point. This
definition allows us to separate
democracy from forms of government
that are clearly not democratic. The
army rulers of Myanmar are not
elected by the people. Those who
happen to be in control of the army
DEMOCRATIC POLITICS

I have heard a
different version.
Democracy is off
the people, far
(from) the people
and (where they)
buy the people.
Why dont we
accept that?

become the rulers of the country.

People have no say in this decision.
Dictators like Pinochet are not elected
by the people. This also applies to
monarchies. The kings of Nepal and
Saudi Arabia rule not because the
people have chosen them to do so but
because they happen to be born into
the royal family.
This simple definition is not
adequate. It reminds us that
democracy is peoples rule. But if we
use this definition in an unthinking
manner, we would end up calling

almost every government that holds an

election a democracy. That would be
very misleading. As we shall find out
in Chapter Four, every government in
contemporary world wants to be
called a democracy, even if it is not
so. That is why we need to carefully
distinguish between a government
that is a democracy and one that
pretends to be one. We can do so by
understanding each word in this
definition carefully and spelling out
the features of a democratic
government.

Ribiang went back home and collected some more famous quotations on democracy. This time she did
not mention the names of the people who said or wrote these. She wants you to read these and comment
on how good or useful these thoughts are:
Democracy gives every man the right to be his own oppressor.
Democracy consists of choosing your dictators after theyve told you what you think it is you want
to hear.
Mans capacity for justice makes democracy possible, but mans inclination to injustice makes
democracy necessary
Democracy is a device that insures we shall be governed no better than we deserve.
All the ills of democracy can be cured by more democracy.

CHECK
YOUR
PROGRESS

This cartoon was

drawn when elections
were held in Iraq with
the presence of US
and other foreign
powers. What do you
think this cartoon is
saying? Why is
democracy written
the way it is?

Stephane Peray, Thailand, Cagle Cartoons Inc.

read
the
cartoon

WHAT

IS

DEMOCRACY? WHY DEMOCRACY?

25

2.2 FEATURES

OF DEMOCRACY

We have started with a simple

definition that democracy is a form
of government in which the rulers
are elected by the people. This
raises many questions:
Who are the rulers in this
definition? Which officials must be
elected for any government to be
called a democracy? Which
decisions may be taken by nonelected officials in a democracy?
What kind of election constitutes
a democratic election? What
conditions must be fulfilled for an
election to be considered
democratic?
Who are the people who can elect
the rulers or get elected as rulers?
Should this include every citizen on
an equal basis? Can a democracy
deny some citizens this right?
Finally, what kind of a form of
government is democracy? Can
elected rulers do whatever they

want in a democracy? Or must a

democratic government function
with some limits? Is it necessary
for a democracy to respect some
rights of the citizens?
Let us consider each of these
questions with the help of some
examples.

M ajor de
cisions bbyy ele
decisions
elecc t e d
leaders

In Pakistan, General Pervez

Musharraf led a military coup in
October 1999. He overthrew a
democratically elected government
and declared himself the Chief
Executive of the country. Later he
changed his designation to President
and in 2002 held a referendum in
the country that granted him a fiveyear extension. Pakistani media,
human rights organisations and
democracy activists said that the
referendum was based on

Emad Hajjaj, Jordan, Cagle Cartoons Inc.

read
the
cartoon

26

DEMOCRATIC POLITICS

Syria is a small west

Asian country. The
ruling Baath Party
and some of its small
allies are the only
parties allowed in that
country. Do you think
this cartoon could
apply to China or
Mexico? What does
the crown of leaves
on democracy
signify?

This cartoon was

drawn in the context
of Latin America. Do
you think it applies to
the Pakistani situation
as well? Think of
other countries where
this could apply?
Does this happen
sometimes in our
country as well?

All this is so remote

for me. Is
democracy all
about rulers and
governments? Can
we talk about a
democratic
classroom? Or a
democratic family?

Ares, Caglecartoon.com, Cagle Cartoons Inc. 22 January 2005

read
the
cartoon

decisions. The power to take final

decision rests with army officials and
with General Musharraf, and none
of them are elected by the people.
This happens in many dictatorships
and monarchies. They formally have
an elected parliament and
government but the real power is
with those who are not elected. In
the previous chapter we read about
the role of the USSR in communist
Poland and that of the US in
contemporary Iraq. Here the real
power was with some external
powers and not with locally elected
representatives. This cannot be called
peoples rule.
This gives us the first feature. In a
democracy the final decisionmaking power must rest with
those elected by the people.
malpractices and fraud. In August
2002 he issued a Legal Framework
Order that amended the Constitution
of Pakistan. According to this Order,
the President can dismiss the national
and provincial assemblies. The work
of the civilian cabinet is supervised
by a National Security Council which
is dominated by military officers.
After passing this law, elections were
held to the national and provincial
assemblies. So Pakistan has had
elections, elected representatives
have some powers. But the final
power rests with military officers and
General Musharraf himself.
Clearly, there are many reasons
why Pakistan under General
Musharraf should not be called a
democracy. But let us focus on one
of these. Can we say that the rulers
are elected by the people in
Pakistan? Not quite. People may
have elected their representatives to
the national and provincial
assemblies but those elected
representatives are not really the
rulers. They cannot take the final
WHAT

IS

DEMOCRACY? WHY DEMOCRACY?

F r ee and fair ele

elecc to rraa l
c ompetition

In China, elections are regularly held

after every five years for electing the
countrys parliament, called
Quanguo Renmin Daibiao Dahui
(National Peoples Congress). The
National Peoples Congress has the
power to appoint the President of the
country. It has nearly 3,000
members elected from all over
China. Some members are elected
by the army. Before contesting
elections, a candidate needs the
approval of the Chinese Communist
Party. Only those who are members
of the Chinese Communist Party or
eight smaller parties allied to it were
allowed to contest elections held in
2002-03. The government is always
formed by the Communist Party.
Since its independence in 1930,
Mexico holds elections after every six
years to elect its President. The
country has never been under a
military or dictators rule. But until
2000 every election was won by a
27

28

Nerilicon, El Economista , Mexico, Cagle Cartoons Inc.

17 May 2005

party called PRI (Institutional

Revolutionary Party). Opposition
parties did contest elections, but
never managed to win. The PRI was
known to use many dirty tricks to win
elections. All those who were
employed in government offices had
to attend its party meetings. Teachers
of government schools used to force
parents to vote for the PRI. Media
largely ignored the activities of
opposition political parties except to
criticise them. Sometimes the polling
booths were shifted from one place
to another in the last minute, which
made it difficult for people to cast their
votes. The PRI spent a large sum of
money in the campaign for its
candidates.
Should we consider the elections
described above as examples of
people electing their rulers? Reading
these examples we get a sense that
we cannot. There are many problems
here. In China the elections do not
offer the people any serious choice.
They have to choose the ruling party
and the candidates approved by it.
Can we call this a choice? In the
Mexican example, people seemed to
really have a choice but in practice
they had no choice. There was no
way the ruling party could be
defeated, even if people were against
it. These are not fair elections.
We can thus add a second feature
to our understanding of democracy.
Holding elections of any kind is not
sufficient. The elections must offer
a real choice between political
alternatives. And it should be
possible for people to use this choice
to remove the existing rulers, if they
wish so. So, a democracy must be
based on a free and fair election
where those currently in power
have a fair chance of losing. We
shall find out more about a
democratic election in Chapter Four.

read
the
cartoon
This cartoon was
titled Building
Democracy and was
first published in a
Latin American
publication. What do
moneybags signify
here? Could this
cartoon be applied to
India?

One person, one vvoo ttee ,

one vvalue
alue

In the previous chapter we read about

how the struggle for democracy was
linked to the demand for universal adult
franchise. This principle has now come
to be accepted almost all over the
world. Yet there are many instances
of denial of equal right to vote.
In Saudi Arabia women do not
have the right to vote.
Estonia has made its citizenship
rules in such a way that people
belonging to Russian minority find
it difficult to get the right to vote.
In Fiji, the electoral system is such
that the vote of an indigenous Fiji
has more value than that of an
Indian-Fijian.
Democracy is based on a
fundamental principle of political
equality. That gives us the third
feature of democracy: in a
democracy, each adult citizen must
have one vote and each vote must
have one value. We shall read more
about it in Chapter Four.
DEMOCRATIC POLITICS

This cartoon is about

the Iraqi election held
after Saddam
Hussains regime was
overthrown. He is
shown behind the
bars. What is the
cartoonist saying
here? Compare the
message of this
cartoon with the first
cartoon in this
chapter.

John Trever, Albuquerque Journal, US, Cagle Cartoons Inc.

read
the
cartoon

R ule of la
w and rrespe
espe
law
especc t
f or rrigh
igh
t
s
ight

Why talk about

Zimbabwe? I read
similar reports from
many parts of our
own country. Why
dont we discuss
that?

Zimbabwe attained independence

from White minority rule in 1980.
Since then the country has been
ruled by ZANU-PF, the party that led
the freedom struggle. Its leader,
Robert Mugabe, has been ruling the
country since independence.
Elections have been held regularly
and always won by ZANU-PF.
President Mugabe is popular but also
uses unfair practices in elections.
Over the years his government has
changed the constitution several
times to increase the powers of the
President and make him less
accountable. Opposition party
workers are harassed and their
meeting disrupted. Public protests
and demonstrations against the
government are declared illegal.
There is a law that limits the right
to criticise the President. Television
and radio are controlled by the
government and give only the ruling
partys version. There are
WHAT

IS

DEMOCRACY? WHY DEMOCRACY?

independent newspapers but the

government harasses those
journalists who go against it. The
government has ignored some court
judgments that went against it and
has pressurised judges.
The example of Zimbabwe shows
that popular approval of the rulers is
necessary in a democracy, but it is
not sufficient. Popular governments
can be undemocratic. Popular leaders
can be autocratic. If we wish to assess
a democracy, it is important to look
at the elections. But it is equally
important to look before and after the
elections. There should be sufficient
room for normal political activity,
including political opposition, in the
period before elections. This requires
that the state should respect some
basic rights of the citizen. They should
be free to think, to have opinions, to
express these in public, to form
associations, to protest and take other
political actions. Everyone should be
equal in the eyes of law. These rights
must be protected by an independent
29

Eric Allie, Pioneer Press, US, Cagle Cartoons Inc.

judiciary whose orders are obeyed by

everyone. We shall read more about
these rights in Chapter Six.
Similarly, there are some conditions
that apply to the way a government
is run after the elections. A
democratic government cannot do
whatever it likes, simply because it
has won an election. It has to respect
some basic rules. In particular it has
to respect some guarantees to the
minorities. Every major decision has
to go through a series of
consultations. Every office bearer has
certain rights and responsibilities
assigned by the constitution and the
law. Each of these is accountable not
only to the people but also to other
independent officials. We shall read
more about this in Chapter Five.
Both these aspects give us the
fourth and final feature of democracy:
a democratic government rules
within limits set by constitutional
law and citizens rights.
30

S ummar
inition
ummaryy def
definition

Let us sum up the discussion so far.

We started with a simple definition
that democracy is a form of
government in which the rulers are
elected by the people. We found that
this definition was not adequate
unless we explained some of the key
words used in it. Through a series of
examples we worked out four features
of democracy as a form of
government. Accordingly, democracy
is a form of government in which:
Rulers elected by the people take
all the major decisions;
Elections offer a choice and fair
opportunity to the people to
change the current rulers;
This choice and opportunity is
available to all the people on an
equal basis; and
The exercise of this choice leads
to a government limited by basic
rules of the constitution and
citizens rights.
DEMOCRATIC POLITICS

read
the
cartoon
Chinese government
blocked free flow of
information on the
internet by placing
restrictions on popular
websites like Google
and Yahoo. The
image of tanks and an
unarmed student
reminds the reader of
another major event in
recent Chinese
history. Find out about
that event.

Read these five examples of working or denial of democracy. Match each of these with the relevant
feature of democracy discussed above.

CHECK
YOUR
PROGRESS

Example

Feature

King of Bhutan has declared that in future he will be

guided by the advice given to him by elected representatives.

Respect for Rights

Many Tamil workers who migrated from India were

not given a right to vote in Sri Lanka.
The king of Nepal imposed a ban on political gatherings,
demonstrations and rallies.
The Indian Supreme Court held that the dissolution of
Bihar assembly was unconstitutional.
Political parties in Bangladesh have agreed that a neutral
government should rule the country at the time of elections.

2.3 WHY

D eba
ting mer
its of
ebating
merits
democr
democraa ccyy

Yolanda: We live in a democratic country. We read

in the previous chapter that all over the world
people want democracy. Countries that were not
democratic earlier are becoming democratic now.
All great people have said nice things about democracy. Isnt it obvious that democracy is the
best? Do we need to debate this?
Tangkini: But Lyngdoh Madam had said we
should not accept something just because it is
famous, just because everyone else accepts
it. Isnt it possible that everyone is following a
wrong path?
Jeni: Yes, it actually is a wrong path. What has
democracy brought to our country? More than
half a century of democracy and there is so
much poverty in the country.
Ribiang: But what has democracy got to do with
it? Do we have poverty because we are democratic or do we have poverty despite being a
democracy?
WHAT

IS

One person one vote

one value
Free and fair
electoral com
petition
Major decisions by
elected leaders

DEMOCRACY?

An argument broke out in Madam

Lyngdohs class. She had finished
teaching the previous section on
what is democracy and asked the
students if they thought democracy
was the best form of government.
Everyone had something to say.

I want to be in
Lyngdoh Madams
class! That sounds
like a democratic
classroom.
Doesnt it?

Rule of law

DEMOCRACY? WHY DEMOCRACY?

Jeni: Whatever, how does it make a difference?

The point is that this cant be the best form of
government. Democracy is all about chaos, instability, corruption and hypocrisy. Politicians
fight among themselves. Who cares for the
country?
Poimon: So, what should we have instead? Go
back to the British rule? Invite some kings to
rule this country?
Rose: I dont know. I think what this country needs
is a strong leader, someone who does not have
to bother about elections and parliament. One
leader should have all the powers. He should
be able to do whatever is needed in countrys
interest. That alone can remove corruption and
poverty from this country.
Someone shouted: That is called dictatorship!
Hoi: What if that person starts using all these
powers for himself and his family? What if he
is corrupt himself?
Rose: I am speaking only of the honest, sincere
and strong leader.
Hoi: But that is not fair. You are comparing a real
democracy with an ideal dictatorship. We
should compare an ideal with an ideal, the real
with the real. Go and check the record of dictators in real life. They are most corrupt, selfish and brutal. It is just that we dont get to
know about this. And what is worse, you cant
even get rid of them.

31

A rgumen
ts against
rguments
democr
democraa ccyy

This conversation has most of the

arguments that we routinely hear
against democracy. Let us go over
some of these arguments:
Leaders keep changing in a
democracy. This leads to instability.
Democracy is all about political
competition and power play. There
is no scope for morality.
So many people have to be
consulted in a democracy that it
leads to delays.
Elected leaders do not know the
best interest of the people. It leads
to bad decisions.
Democracy leads to corruption for
it is based on electoral competition.
Ordinary people dont know what
is good for them; they should not
decide anything.
Are there some other arguments
against democracy that you can
think of? Which of these arguments
applies mainly to democracy? Which
of these can apply to misuse of any
form of government? Which of these
do you agree with?
Clearly, democracy is not a
magical solution for all the
problems. It has not ended poverty
in our country and in other parts of
the world. Democracy as a form of
32

government only ensures that

people take their own decisions. This
does not guarantee that their
decisions will be good. People can
make mistakes. Involving the people
in these decisions does lead
to delays in decision making. It
is also true that democracy leads
to frequent changes in leadership.
Sometimes this can set back
big decisions and affect the
governments efficiency.
These arguments show that
democracy of the kind we see may
not be the ideal form of government.
But that is not a question we face in
real life. The real question we face
is different: is democracy better than
other forms of government that are
there for us to choose from?

A rgumen
ts ffor
or democr
rguments
democraa ccyy

Chinas famine of 1958-1961 was

the worst recorded famine in world
history. Nearly three crore people
died in this famine. During those
days, Indias economic condition
was not much better than China. Yet
India did not have a famine of the
kind China had. Economists think

This cartoon is from

Brazil, a country that
has long experience
of dictatorship. It is
entitled The Hidden
Side of Dictatorship.
Which hidden sides
does this cartoon
depict? Is it
necessary for every
dictatorship to have a
hidden side? Find this
out about the
dictators discussed in
the first chapter and,
if possible, about Sani
Abacha in Nigeria and
Ferdinand Marcos in
the Philippines.

read
the
cartoon

Osmani Simanca, Brazil,

Cagle Cartoons Inc. 6 December 2004

Madam Lyngdoh was listening to this

discussion with interest. Now she
stepped in: I was delighted to see you
all arguing so passionately. I dont
know who is right and who is wrong.
That is for you to settle. But I did feel
that you all wanted to speak your
mind. You may have felt very bad if
someone tried to stop you or if
someone punished you for saying
what you felt. Would you be able to
do that in a country that is not
democratic? Is that a good argument
for democracy?

DEMOCRATIC POLITICS

What would have

happened if India
was not a
democracy?
Could we have
stayed together as
a single nation?

that this was a result of different

government policies in the two
countries. The existence of
democracy in India made the Indian
government respond to food scarcity
in a way that the Chinese
government did not. They point out
that no large-scale famine has ever
taken place in an independent and
democratic country. If China too had
multiparty elections, an opposition
party and a press free to criticise the
government, then so many people
may not have died in the famine.
This example brings out one of the
reasons why democracy is considered
the best form of government.
Democracy is better than any other
form of government in responding to
the needs of the people. A nondemocratic government may and can
respond to the peoples needs, but it
all depends on the wishes of the
people who rule. If the rulers dont
want to, they dont have to act
according to the wishes of the people.
A democracy requires that the rulers
have to attend to the needs of the
people. A democratic government is
a better government because it is a
more accountable form of
government.
There is another reason why
democracy should lead to better
decisions than any non-democratic
government. Democracy is based on
consultation and discussion. A
democratic decision always involves
many persons, discussions and
meetings. When a number of people
put their heads together, they are
able to point out possible mistakes
in any decision. This takes time. But
there is a big advantage in taking
time over important decisions. This
reduces the chances of rash or
irresponsible decisions. Thus
democracy improves the quality
of decision-making.
WHAT

IS

DEMOCRACY? WHY DEMOCRACY?

This is related to the third

argument. Democracy provides a
method to deal with differences
and conflicts. In any society people
are bound to have differences of
opinions and interests. These
differences are particularly sharp in
a country like ours which has an
amazing social diversity. People
belong to different regions, speak
different languages, practise
different religions and have different
castes. They look at the world very
differently and have different
preferences. The preferences of one
group can clash with those of other
groups. How do we resolve such a
conflict? The conflict can be solved
by brutal power. Whichever group
is more powerful will dictate its
terms and others will have to accept
that. But that would lead to
resentment and unhappiness.
Different groups may not be able to
live together for long in such a way.
Democracy provides the only
peaceful solution to this problem. In
democracy, no one is a permanent
winner. No one is a permanent loser.
Different groups can live with one
another peacefully. In a diverse
country like India, democracy keeps
our country together.
These three arguments were about
the effects of democracy on the
quality of government and social life.
But the strongest argument for
democracy is not about what
democracy does to the government.
It is about what democracy does to
the citizens. Even if democracy does
not bring about better decisions and
accountable government, it is still
better than other forms of
government. Democracy enhances
the dignity of citizens. As we
discussed above, democracy is
based on the principle of political
equality, on recognising that the
33

the rulers have to change their

decisions, or the rulers can be
changed. This cannot happen in a
non-democratic government.
Let us sum it up. Democracy
cannot get us everything and is not
the solution to all problems. But it
is clearly better than any other
alternative that we know. It offers
better chances of a good decision, it
is likely to respect peoples own
wishes and allows different kinds of
people to live together. Even when
it fails to do some of these things, it
allows a way of correcting its
mistakes and offers more dignity to
all citizens. That is why democracy
is considered the best form of
government.
Cam Cardow, The Ottawa Citizen, Canada, Cagle Cartoons Inc. 30 May 2004.

poorest and the least educated has

the same status as the rich and the
educated. People are not subjects of
a ruler, they are the rulers
themselves. Even when they make
mistakes, they are responsible for
their conduct.
Finally, democracy is better than
other forms of government because
it allows us to correct its own
mistakes. As we saw above, there is
no guarantee that mistakes cannot
be made in democracy. No form of
government can guarantee that. The
advantage in a democracy is that
such mistakes cannot be hidden for
long. There is a space for public
discussion on these mistakes. And
there is a room for correction. Either

Rajesh and Muzaffar read an article. It showed that no democracy has ever gone to war with another
democracy. Wars take place only when one of the two governments is non-democratic. The article
said that this was a great merit of democracy. After reading the essay, Rajesh and Muzaffar had
different reactions. Rajesh said that this was not a good argument for democracy. It was just a matter
of chance. It is possible that in future democracies may have wars. Muzaffar said that it could not be
a matter of chance. Democracies take decisions in such a way that it reduces the chances of war.
Which of the two positions do you agree with and why?

34

DEMOCRATIC POLITICS

This cartoon was

published in Canada
just before its
parliamentary
elections of 2004.
Everyone, including
the cartoonist,
expected the Liberal
party to win once
again. When the
results came, the
Liberal Party lost the
elections. Is this
cartoon an argument
against democracy or
for democracy?

read
the
cartoon

CHECK
YOUR
PROGRESS

read
the
cartoon

2.4 BROADER

MEANINGS OF DEMOCRACY

In this chapter we have considered

the meaning of democracy in a
limited and descriptive sense. We
have understood democracy as a
form of government. This way of
defining democracy helps us to
identify a clear set of minimal
features that a democracy must
have. The most common form that
democracy takes in our times is that
of a representative democracy. You
have already read about this in the
previous classes. In the countries we
call democracy, all the people do not
rule. A majority is allowed to take
decisions on behalf of all the people.
Even the majority does not rule
directly. The majority of people rule

through their elected representatives.

This become necessary because:
Modern democracies involve such
a large number of people that it is
physically impossible for them to
sit together and take a collective
decision.
Even if they could, the citizen does
not have the time, the desire or the
skills to take part in all the
decisions.
This gives us a clear but minimal
understanding of democracy. This
clarity helps us to distinguish
democracies from non-democracies.
But it does not allow us to
distinguish between a democracy
and a good democracy. It does not
R.K. Laxman, The Times of India

This famous cartoon

by R K Laxman
comments on the
celebrations of the
fifty years of
independence. How
many images on the
wall do you recognize?
Do many common
people feel the way the
common man in this
cartoon does?

WHAT

IS

DEMOCRACY? WHY DEMOCRACY?

35

allow us to see the operation of

democracy beyond government. For
this we need to turn to broader
meanings of democracy.
Sometimes we use democracy for
organisations other than the
government. Just read these
statements:
We are a very democratic family.
Whenever a decision has to be taken,
we all sit down and arrive at a
consensus. My opinion matters as much
as my fathers.
I dont like teachers who do not allow
students to speak and ask questions in
the class. I would like to have teachers
with democratic temperament.
One leader and his family members
decide everything in this party. How can
they talk of democracy?

These ways of using the word

democracy go back to its basic sense
of a method of taking decisions. A
democratic decision involves
consultation with and consent of all
those who are affected by that
decision. Those who are not
powerful have the same say in taking
the decision as those who are
powerful. This can apply to a
government or a family or any other
organisation. Thus democracy is
also a principle that can be applied
to any sphere of life.
Sometimes we use the word
democracy not to describe any
existing government but to set up
an ideal standard that all
democracies must aim to become:
True democracy will come to this
country only when no one goes hungry
to bed.
In a democracy every citizen must be
able to play equal role in decision
making. For this you dont need just an
equal right to vote. Every citizen needs
to have equal information, basic
education, equal resources and a lot of
commitment.

36

If we take these ideals seriously,

then no country in the world is a
democracy. Yet an understanding of
democracy as an ideal reminds us
of why we value democracy. It
enables us to judge an existing
democracy and identify its
weaknesses. It helps us to
distinguish between a minimal
democracy and a good democracy.
In this book we do not deal much
with this expanded notion of
democracy. Our focus here is with
some core institutional features of
democracy as a form of government.
Next year you will read more about
a democratic society and ways of
evaluating our democracy. At this
stage we just need to note that
democracy can apply to many
spheres of life and that democracy
can take many forms. There can be
various ways of taking decisions in
a democratic manner, as long as the
basic principle of consultation on an
equal basis is accepted. The most
common form of democracy in
todays world is rule through
peoples elected representatives. We
shall read more about that in
Chapter Four. But if the community
is small, there can be other ways of
taking democratic decisions. All the
people can sit together and take
decisions directly. This is how Gram
Sabha should work in a village. Can
you think of some other democratic
ways of decision making?

A C T I V I T Y
Find out the total number of eligible voters in your
assembly constituency and your parliamentary
constituency. Find out how many people can fit
into the largest stadium in your area. Is it possible
for all the voters in your parliamentary or assembly constituency to sit together and have a
meaningful discussion?

DEMOCRATIC POLITICS

In my village the
Gram Sabha never
meets. Is that
democratic?

This also means that no country

is a perfect democracy. The features
of democracy that we discussed in
this chapter provide only the
minimum
conditions
of
a
democracy. That does not make it
an ideal democracy. Every
democracy has to try to realise the
ideals of a democratic decisionmaking. This cannot be achieved
once and for all. This requires a
constant effort to save and
strengthen democratic forms of
decision-making. What we do as
citizens can make a difference to
making our country more or less
democratic. This is the strength and

exercises

the weakness of democracy: the fate

of the country depends not just on
what the rulers do, but mainly on
what we, as citizens, do.
This is what distinguished
democracy from other governments.
Other forms of government like
monarchy, dictatorship or one-party
rule do not require all citizens to take
part in politics. In fact most nondemocratic governments would like
citizens not to take part in politics.
But democracy depends on active
political participation by all the
citizens. That is why a study of
democracy must focus on
democratic politics.

Here is some information about four countries. Based on this

information, how would you classify each of these countries. Write
democratic, undemocratic or not sure against each of these.
a Country A: People who do not accept the countrys official religion
do not have a right to vote.
b Country B: The same party has been winning elections for the last
twenty years.
c Country C: Ruling party has lost in the last three elections.
d Country D: There is no independent election commission.

Here is some information about four countries. Based on this

information, how would you classify each of these countries. Write
democratic, undemocratic or not sure against each of these.
a Country P: The parliament cannot pass a law about the army
without the consent of the Chief of Army.
b Country Q: The parliament cannot pass a law reducing the powers
of the judiciary.
c Country R: The countrys leaders cannot sign any treaty with
another country without taking permission from its neighbouring
country.
d Country S: All the major economic decisions about the country
are taken by officials of the central bank which the ministers cannot
change.

Which of these is not a good argument in favour of democracy? Why?

a People feel free and equal in a democracy.
b Democracies resolve conflict in a better way than others.
c Democratic government is more accountable to the people.
d Democracies are more prosperous than others.

WHAT

IS

DEMOCRACY? WHY DEMOCRACY?

37

exercises

Each of these statements contains a democratic and an undemocratic

element. Write out the two separately for each statement.
a A minister said that some laws have to be passed by the parliament
in order to conform to the regulations decided by the World Trade
Organisation (WTO).
b The Election Commission ordered re-polling in a constituency
where large-scale rigging was reported.
c Womens representation in the parliament has barely reached 10
per cent. This led womens organisations to demand one-third seats
for women.

Which of these is not a valid reason for arguing that there is a lesser
possibility of famine in a democratic country?
a Opposition parties can draw attention to hunger and starvation.
b Free press can report suffering from famine in different parts of
the country.
c Government fears its defeat in the next elections.
d People are free to believe in and practise any religion.

There are 40 villages in a district where the government has made

no provision for drinking water. These villagers met and considered
many methods of forcing the government to respond to their need.
Which of these is not a democratic method?
a Filing a case in the courts claiming that water is part of right to life.
b Boycotting the next elections to give a message to all parties.
c Organising public meetings against governments policies.
d Paying money to government officials to get water.

Write a response to the following arguments against democracy:

a Army is the most disciplined and corruption-free organisation in
the country. Therefore army should rule the country.
b Rule of the majority means the rule of ignorant people. What we
need is the rule of the wise, even if they are in small numbers.
c If we want religious leaders to guide us in spiritual matters, why
not invite them to guide us in politics as well. The country should
be ruled by religious leaders.

Are the following statements in keeping with democracy as a

value? Why?
a Father to daughter: I dont want to hear your opinion about your
marriage. In our family children marry where the parents tell them
to.
b Teacher to student: Dont disturb my concentration by asking me
questions in the classroom.
c Employee to the officer: Our working hours must be reduced
according to the law.

Consider the following facts about a country and decide if you would
call it a democracy. Give reasons to support your decision.

38

DEMOCRATIC POLITICS

exercises

a All the citizens of the country have right to vote. Elections are held
regularly.
b The country took loan from international agencies. One of the
conditions for giving loan was that the government would reduce
its expenses on education and health.
c People speak more than seven languages but education is available
only in one language, the language spoken by 52 percent people
of that country.
d Several organisations have given a call for peaceful demonstrations
and nation wide strikes in the country to oppose these policies.
Government has arrested these leaders.
e The government owns the radio and television in the country. All
the newspapers have to get permission from the government to
publish any news about governments policies and protests.
10

In 2004 a report published in USA pointed to the increasing

inequalities in that country. Inequalities in income reflected in the
participation of people in democracy. It also shaped their abilities to
influence the decisions taken by the government. The report
highlighted that:
If an average Black family earns $ 100 then the income of average
White family is $ 162. A White family has twelve times more wealth
than the average Black family.
In a Presidents election nearly 9 out of 10 individuals in families
with income over $ 75,000 have voted. These people are the top
20% of the population in terms of their income. On the other hand
only 5 people out of 10 from families with income less than $
15,000 have voted. They are the bottom 20% of the population in
terms of their income.
About 95% contribution to the political parties comes from the
rich. This gives them opportunity to express their opinions and
concerns, which is not available to most citizens.
As poor sections participate less in politics, the government does
not listen to their concerns coming out of poverty, getting job,
education, health care and housing for them. Politicians hear most
regularly about the concerns of business persons and the rich.
Write an essay on Democracy and Poverty using the information
given in this report but using examples from India.

Most newspapers have an editorial page. On that page the newspaper

publishes its own opinions about current affairs. The paper also publishes
the views of other writers and intellectuals and letters written by the
readers. Follow any one newspaper for one month and collect editorials,
articles and letters on that page that have anything to do with democracy.
Classify these into the following categories:

Constitutional and legal aspects of democracy

Citizens rights

Electoral and party politics

Criticism of democracy
WHAT

IS

DEMOCRACY? WHY DEMOCRACY?

39

CHAPTER 3

CONSTITUTIONAL
DESIGN

OVERVIEW
We noted in the previous chapter that in a democracy the rulers are not
free to do what they like. There are certain basic rules that the citizens
and the government have to follow. All such rules together are called
constitution. As the supreme law of the country, the constitution determines
the rights of citizens, the powers of the government and how the government
should function.
In this chapter we ask some basic questions about the constitutional
design of a democracy. Why do we need a constitution? How are the
constitutions drawn up? Who designs them and in what way? What are
the values that shape the constitutions in democratic states? Once a
constitution is accepted, can we make changes later as required by the
changing conditions?
One recent instance of designing constitution for a democratic state is
that of the South Africa. We begin this chapter by looking at what happened
there and how the South Africans went about this task of designing their
constitution. Then we turn to how the Indian Constitution was made,
what its foundational values are, and how it provides a good framework
for the conduct of citizens life and that of the government.
40

DEMOCRATIC POLITICS

3.1 DEMOCRATIC CONSTITUTION

SOUTH AFRICA
and I have fought against black
domination. I have cherished the ideal of
a democratic and free society in which all
persons live together in harmony and with
equal opportunities. It is an ideal which I
hope to live for and to achieve. But if
needs be, it is an ideal for which I am
prepared to die.

Nelson Mandela

South Africa History Online

A signboard emblematic of
the tense relations of the
apartheid era, 1953.

This was Nelson Mandela, being

tried for treason by the white South
African government. He and seven
other leaders were sentenced to life
imprisonment in 1964 for daring to
oppose the apartheid regime in his
country. He spent the next 28 years
in South Africas most dreaded
prison, Robben Island.
1

apartheid divided the people and

labelled them on the basis of their
skin colour. The native people of
South Africa are black in colour.
They made up about three-fourth
of the population and were called
blacks. Besides these two groups,
there were people of mixed races
who were called coloured and
people who migrated from India.
The white rulers treated all nonwhites as inferiors. The non-whites
did not have voting rights.
The apartheid system was
particularly oppressive for the
blacks. They were forbidden from
living in white areas. They could
work in white areas only if they had
a permit. Trains, buses, taxis,
hotels, hospitals, schools and
colleges, libraries, cinema halls,
theatres, beaches, swimming pools,
2

S tr
uggle against apar
theid
truggle
apartheid

2
Sign on Durban beach
in English, Afrikaans
and Zulu
In English it reads:
CITY OF DURBAN Under
section 37 of the Durban
beach by-laws, this bathing
area is reserved for the sole
use of members of the
white race group.

Apartheid was the name of a system

of racial discrimination unique to
South Africa. The white Europeans
imposed this system on South
Africa. During the seventeenth and
eighteenth centuries, the trading
companies from Europe occupied it
with arms and force, in the way they
occupied India. But unlike India, a
large number of whites had settled
in South Africa and became the
local rulers. The system of

CONSTITUTIONAL DESIGN

John Mullen, Wikipedia, GNU Free Documentation License

I have fought against white domination

IN

41

public toilets, were all separate for

the whites and blacks. This was
called segregation. They could not
even visit the churches where the
whites worshipped. Blacks could not
form associations or protest against
the terrible treatment.
Since 1950, the blacks, coloured
and Indians fought against the
apartheid system. They launched
protest marches and strikes. The
African National Congress (ANC) was
the umbrella organisation that led
the struggle against the policies of
segregation. This included many
workers unions and the Communist
Party. Many sensitive whites also
joined the ANC to oppose apartheid
and played a leading role in this
struggle. Several countries denounced apartheid as unjust and
racist. But the white racist government continued to rule by detaining, torturing and killing thousands
of black and coloured people.

A C T I V I T Y
Make a poster on the life and struggle of Nelson
Mandela.
If available, read some portions of his autobiography, The Long Walk to Freedom, in the
classroom.

To w a rrds
ds a ne
w cconstitution
onstitution
new

As protests and struggles against

apartheid had increased, the
government realised that they could
no longer keep the blacks under
their rule through repression. The
white regime changed its policies.
Discriminatory laws were repealed.
Ban on political parties and
restrictions on the media were lifted.
After 28 years of imprisonment,
Nelson Mandela walked out of the
jail as a free man. Finally, at the
midnight of 26 April 1994, the new
42

national flag of the Republic of South

Africa was unfurled marking the
newly born democracy in the world.
The apartheid government came to
an end, paving way for the formation
of a multi-racial government.
How did this come about? Let us
hear Mandela, the first president of
this new South Africa, on this extraordinary transition:
Historical enemies succeeded in
negotiating a peaceful transition from
apartheid to democracy exactly because
we were prepared to accept the inherent
capacity for goodness in the other. My
wish is that South Africans never give up
on the belief in goodness, that they
cherish that faith in human beings is the
cornerstone of our democracy.

After the emergence of the new

democratic South Africa, black
leaders appealed to fellow blacks to
forgive the whites for the atrocities
they had committed while in power.
They said let us build a new South
Africa based on equality of all races
and men and women, on democratic
values, social justice and human
rights. The party that ruled through
oppression and brutal killings and
the party that led the freedom
struggle sat together to draw up a
common constitution.
After two years of discussion and
debate they came out with one of the
finest constitutions the world has
ever had. This constitution gave to
its citizens the most extensive rights
available in any country. Together,
they decided that in the search for
a solution to the problems, nobody
should be excluded, no one should
be treated as a demon. They agreed
that everybody should become part
of the solution, whatever they might
have done or represented in the
past. The preamble to the South
African Constitution (see page 50)
sums up this spirit.
DEMOCRATIC POLITICS

What would have

happened in South
Africa if the black
majority had
decided to take
revenge on the
whites for all their
oppression and
exploitation?

Wikipedia, GNU Free Documentation License

The South African constitution

inspires democrats all over the
world. A state denounced by the
entire world till recently as the most
undemocratic one is now seen as a
model of democracy. What made this
change
possible
was
the
determination of the people of South
Africa to work together, to transform
bitter experiences into the binding
glue of a rainbow nation. Speaking
on the South African Constitution,
Mandela said:
The Constitution of South Africa speaks
of both the past and the future. On the one
hand, it is a solemn pact in which we, as
South Africans, declare to one another that
we shall never permit a repetition of our
racist, brutal and repressive past. But it is
more than that. It is also a charter for the
transformation of our country into one
which is truly shared by all its people a
country which in the fullest sense belongs
to all of us, black and white, women and
men.
This image captures the spirit of South Africa today. South
Africans call themselves a rainbow nation. Can you guess
why?

CHECK
YOUR
PROGRESS

Does the story of South African struggle for freedom remind you of the Indian national movement?
Make a list of similarities and dissimilarities between the two on the following points:
Nature of colonialism
Relationship between different communities
Leadership: Gandhi/ Mandela
Party that led the struggle: African National Congress/ Indian National Congress
Method of struggle

3.2 WHY

DO WE NEED A CONSTITUTION?

The South African example is a good

way to understand why we need a
constitution
and
what
do
constitutions do. The oppressor and
the oppressed in this new democracy
were planning to live together as
equals. It was not going to be easy for
them to trust each other. They had
CONSTITUTIONAL DESIGN

their fears. They wanted to safeguard

their interests. The black majority
was keen to ensure that the
democratic principle of majority rule
was not compromised. They wanted
substantial social and economic
rights. The white minority was keen
to protect its privileges and property.
43

After long negotiations both parties

agreed to a compromise. The whites
agreed to the principle of majority rule
and that of one person one vote. They
also agreed to accept some basic
rights for the poor and the workers.
The blacks agreed that majority rule
would not be absolute. They agreed
that the majority would not take away
the property of the white minority.
This compromise was not easy. How
was this compromise going to be
implemented? Even if they managed
to trust each other, what was the
guarantee that this trust will not be
broken in future?
The only way to build and
maintain trust in such a situation
is to write down some rules of the
game that everyone would abide by.
These rules lay down how the rulers
are to be chosen in future. These
rules also determine what the
elected governments are empowered
to do and what they cannot do.
Finally these rules decide the rights
of the citizen. These rules will work
only if the winner cannot change
them very easily. This is what the
South Africans did. They agreed on
some basic rules. They also agreed
that these rules will be supreme,
that no government will be able to
ignore these. This set of basic rules
is called a constitution.
Constitution making is not unique
to South Africa. Every country has
diverse groups of people. Their
relationship may not have been as
bad as that between the whites and
the blacks in South Africa. But all over
the world people have differences of
opinion and interests. Whether
democratic or not, most countries in
the world need to have these basic
rules. This applies not just to
governments. Any association needs
to have its constitution. It could be a
club in your area, a cooperative
44

society or a political party, they all

need a constitution.

A C T I V I T Y
Approach a club or cooperative society or union or
political party in your locality. Get a copy of their
rule book (it is often called Rules of Association)
and read it. Are these rules in accordance with
principles of democracy? Do they give membership
to any person without discrimination?

Thus, the constitution of a country

is a set of written rules that are
accepted by all people living together
in a country. Constitution is the
supreme law that determines the
relationship among people living in
a territory (called citizens) and also
the relationship between the people
and government. A constitution does
many things:
First, it generates a degree of trust
and coordination that is necessary
for different kind of people to live
together;
Second, it specifies how the
government will be constituted,
who will have power to take which
decisions;
Third, it lays down limits on the
powers of the government and tells
us what the rights of the citizens
are; and
Fourth,
it expresses the
aspirations of the people about
creating a good society.
All countries that have constitutions
are not necessarily democratic. But
all countries that are democratic will
have constitutions. After the War of
Independence against Great Britain,
the Americans gave themselves a
constitution. After the Revolution, the
French people approved a democratic
constitution. Since then it has
become a practice in all democracies
to have a written constitution.
DEMOCRATIC POLITICS

This is not fair!

What was the point
in having a
Constituent
Assembly in India if
all the basics were
already decided?

3.3 MAKING

(1875-1950) born: Gujarat.

Minister of Home,
Information and
Broadcasting in the Interim
Government. Lawyer and
leader of Bardoli peasant
satyagraha. Played a
decisive role in the
integration of the Indian
princely states. Later:
Deputy Prime Minister.

All sketches by Rajeev Kumar

Vallabhbhai
atel
Jhaverbhai PPatel

Abul Kalam Azad

(1888-1958)
born: Saudi Arabia.
Educationist, author and
theologian; scholar of
Arabic. Congress leader,
active in the national
movement. Opposed
Muslim separatist politics.
Later: Education Minister in
the first union cabinet.

OF THE

INDIAN CONSTITUTION

Like South Africa, Indias

Constitution was also drawn up
under very difficult circumstances.
The making of the constitution for a
huge and diverse country like India
was not an easy affair. At that time
the people of India were emerging
from the status of subjects to that
of citizens. The country was born
through a partition on the basis of
religious differences. This was a
traumatic experience for the people
of India and Pakistan.
Atleast ten lakh people were killed
on both sides of the border in
partition related violence. There was
another problem. The British had
left it to the rulers of the princely
states to decide whether they
wanted to merge with India or with
Pakistan or remain independent.
The merger of these princely states
was a difficult and uncertain task.
When the constitution was being
written, the future of the country did
not look as secure as it does today.
The makers of the constitution had
anxieties about the present and the
future of the country.

A C T I V I T Y
Speak to your grandparents or some other elders
in your locality. Ask them if they have any memory
of partition or independence or the making of the
constitution. What were their fears and hopes
about the country at that time? Discuss these in
the classroom.

T.T
.Krishnamachari
.T.Krishnamachari
(1899-1974)
born: Tamil Nadu.
Member, Drafting
Committee. Entrepreneur
and Congress leader. Later:
Finance Minister in the
Union Cabinet.

T he pa
th ttoo CConstitution
onstitution
path

Despite all these difficulties, there

was one big advantage for the
makers of the Indian Constitution.
Unlike South Africa, they did not
have to create a consensus about
what a democratic India should look
CONSTITUTIONAL DESIGN

like. Much of this consensus had

evolved during the freedom struggle.
Our national movement was not
merely a struggle against a foreign
rule. It was also a struggle to
rejuvenate our country and to
transform our society and politics.
There were sharp differences of
opinion within the freedom struggle
about the path India should take
after
Independence.
Such
differences exist even today. Yet
some basic ideas had come to be
accepted by almost everyone.
As far back as in 1928, Motilal
Nehru and eight other Congress
leaders drafted a constitution for
India. In 1931, the resolution at the
Karachi session of the Indian
National Congress dwelt on how
independent Indias constitution
should look like. Both these
documents were committed to the
inclusion of universal adult franchise,
right to freedom and equality and to
protecting the rights of minorities in
the constitution of independent India.
Thus some basic values were
accepted by all leaders much before
the Constituent Assembly met to
deliberate on the Constitution.
The familiarity with political
institutions of colonial rule also
helped develop an agreement over
the institutional design. The British
rule had given voting rights only to
a few. On that basis the British had
introduced very weak legislatures.
Elections were held in 1937 to
Provincial Legislatures and
Ministries all over British India.
These were not fully democratic
governments. But the experience
gained by Indians in the working of
the legislative institutions proved to
be very useful for the country in
setting up its own institutions and
45

working in them. That is why the

Indian constitution adopted many
institutional details and procedures
from colonial laws like the Government
of India Act, 1935.
Years of thinking and deliberation
on the framework of the constitution
had another benefit. Our leaders
gained confidence to learn from
other countries, but on our own
terms. Many of our leaders were
inspired by the ideals of French
Revolution, the practice of
parliamentary democracy in Britain
and the Bill of Rights in the US. The
socialist revolution in Russia had
inspired many Indians to think of
shaping a system based on social
and economic equality. Yet they
were not simply imitating what
others had done. At each step they
were questioning whether these
things suited our country. All these
factors contributed to the making of
our Constitution.

T he CConstituen
onstituen
ssembly
onstituentt AAssembly

Who, then, were the makers of the

Indian Constitution? You will find
here very brief sketch of some of the
leaders who played an important
role in making the Constitution.

A C T I V I T Y
Find out more about any member of the
Constituent Assembly from your state or region
who is not mentioned here. Collect a photograph
or make a sketch of that leader. Write a short
note on him or her, following the same style as
used here: Name (year of birth-year of death),
place of birth (by current political boundaries),
brief description of political activities; role played
after the Constituent Assembly.

The drafting of the document called

the constitution was done by an
assembly of elected representatives
46

called the Constituent Assembly.

Elections to the Constituent
Assembly were held in July 1946. Its
first meeting was held in December
1946. Soon after, the country was
divided into India and Pakistan. The
Constituent Assembly was also
divided into the Constituent Assembly
of India and that of Pakistan. The
Constituent Assembly that wrote
the Indian constitution had 299
members. The Assembly adopted
the Constitution on 26 November
1949 but it came into effect on 26
January 1950. To mark this day we
celebrate January 26 as Republic
Day every year.
Why should we accept the
Constitution made by this Assembly
more than fifty years ago? We have
already noted one reason above. The
Constitution does not reflect the
views of its members alone. It
expresses a broad consensus of its
time. Many countries of the world
have had to rewrite their
Constitution afresh because the
basic rules were not accepted to all
major social groups or political
parties. In some other countries, the
Constitution exists as a mere piece
of paper. No one actually follows it.
The experience of our Constitution
is different. Over the last half a
century, several groups have
questioned some provisions of the
Constitution. But no large social
group or political party has ever
questioned the legitimacy of the
Constitution itself. This is an unusual
achievement for any constitution.
The second reason for accepting
the Constitution is that the
Constituent Assembly represented
the people of India. There was no
universal adult franchise at that
time. So the Constituent Assembly
could not have been chosen directly
by all the people of India. It was
DEMOCRATIC POLITICS

Rajendra Prasad
(1884-1963) born: Bihar.
President of the Constituent
Assembly. Lawyer, known
for his role in the
Champaran satyagraha. Three
times the president of
Congress. Later: the first
President of India.

Jaipal Singh
(1903-1970)
born: Jharkhand
A sportsman and
educationist. Captain of the
first national Hockey team.
Founder President of
Adivasi Maha Sabha. Later:
founder of Jharkhand Party.

H. C. Mookherjee
(1887-1956)
born: Bengal.
Vice-Chairman of the
Constituent Assembly.
Reputed author and
educationist. Congress
leader. Member of All India
Christian Council and
Bengal Legislative
Assembly. Later: Governor
of West Bengal.

G. Dur
gabai Deshmukh
Durgabai
(1909-1981)
born: Andhra Pradesh.
Advocate and public activist
for womens emancipation.
Founder of Andhra Mahila
Sabha. Congress leader.
Later: Founder Chairperson
of Central Social Welfare
Board.

CHECK
YOUR
PROGRESS

elected mainly by the members of

the existing Provincial Legislatures
that we mentioned above. This
ensured a fair geographical share of
members from all the regions of the
country. The Assembly was
dominated by the Indian National
Congress, the party that led Indias
freedom struggle. But the Congress
itself included a variety of political
groups and opinions. The Assembly
had many members who did not
agree with the Congress. In social
terms too, the Assembly represented
members from different language
groups, castes, classes, religions
and occupations. Even if the
Constituent Assembly was elected
by universal adult franchise, its
composition would not have been
very different.
Finally, the manner in which the
Constituent Assembly worked gives
sanctity to the Constitution. The

Constituent Assembly worked in a

systematic, open and consensual
manner. First some basic principles
were decided and agreed upon. Then
a Drafting Committee chaired by Dr.
B.R. Ambedkar prepared a draft
constitution for discussion. Several
rounds of thorough discussion took
place on the Draft Constitution,
clause by clause. More than two
thousand amendments were
considered.
The
members
deliberated for 114 days spread over
three years. Every document
presented and every word spoken in
the Constituent Assembly has been
recorded and preserved. These are
called Constituent Assembly
Debates. When printed, these
debates are 12 bulky volumes! These
debates provide the rationale behind
every provision of the Constitution.
These are used to interpret the
meaning of the Constitution.

Read the information about all the makers of the Indian Constitution given in the side columns here. You
dont need to memorise this information. Just give examples from these to support the following
statements:
1. The Assembly had many members who were not with the Congress
2. The Assembly represented members from different social groups
3. Members of the Assembly believed in different ideologies

3.4 GUIDING VALUES OF THE INDIAN CONSTITUTION

Baldev Singh
( 1901-1961)
born: Haryana.
A successful entrepreneur
and leader of the Panthic
Akali Party in the Punjab
Assembly. A nominee of
the Congress in the
Constituent Assembly.
Later: Defence Minister in
the Union Cabinet.

In this book we shall study the

exact provisions of the Constitution
on different subjects. At this stage
let us begin by understanding the
overall philosophy of what our
Constitution is all about. We can do
this in two ways. We can
understand it by reading the views
of some of our major leaders on our
Constitution. But it is equally
important to read what the
Constitution says about its own
philosophy. This is what the
preamble to the Constitution does.
CONSTITUTIONAL DESIGN

Let us turn to these, one by one.

The Dream and the Promise

Some of you may have noticed a
name missing from the sketches of
the makers of the constitution:
Mahatma Gandhi. He was not a
member of the Constituent
Assembly. Yet there were many
members who followed his vision.
Years ago, writing in his magazine
Young India in 1931, he had spelt
out what he wanted the Constitution
to do:
47

I shall strive for a constitution which will release India from all thralldom
and patronage I shall work for an India in which the poorest shall feel that it
is their country in whose making they have an effective voice; an India in which
there shall be no high class and low class of people; an India in

Kanhaiyalal Maniklal
Munshi

which all communities shall live in perfect harmony. There

(1887-1971) born:Gujarat.
Advocate, historian and
linguist. Congress leader
and Gandhian. Later:
Minister in the Union
Cabinet. Founder of the
Swatantra Party.

can be no room in such an India for the curse of

untouchability or the curse of the intoxicating drinks
and drugs. Women will enjoy the same rights as men
I shall be satisfied with nothing else.
This dream of an India that has
eliminated inequality was shared by
Dr. Ambedkar, who played a key role
in the making of the Constitution but
he had a different understanding of

how inequalities could be removed. He

often bitterly criticised Mahatma
Gandhi and his vision. In his concluding speech to the Constituent Assem
bly he stated his anxiety very clearly:

On the 26th of January 1950 we are going to enter a life of contradictions.

In politics we will have equality and in social and economic life we will have
inequality. In politics we will be recognising the principle of one man one vote and

Bhimrao Ramji
Ambedkar
(1891-1956) born: Madhya
Pradesh. Chairman of the
Drafting Committee. Social
revolutionary thinker and
agitator against caste
divisions and caste based
inequalities. Later: Law
minister in the first cabinet
of post-independence India.
Founder of Republican Party
of India.

one vote one value. In our social and economic life, we shall, by reason of our
social and economic structure, continue to deny the principle of one man one
value. How long shall we continue to live this life of contradictions? How long shall
we continue to deny equality in our social and economic life? If we continue to
deny it for long, we will do so only by putting our political democracy in peril.
Finally let us turn to Jawaharlal
Nehru giving his famous speech to the
48

Constituent Assembly at the stroke

of midnight on August 15, 1947:
DEMOCRATIC POLITICS

Shyama Prasad
Mukherjee
(1901-1953) born: West
Bengal. Minister for
Industry and Supply in the
Interim Government.
Educationist and lawyer.
Active in Hindu Mahasabha.
Later: Founder President of
Bharatiya Jansangh.

Long years ago we made a tryst with destiny

destiny,, and now the time comes
when we shall redeem our pledge, not wholly or in full measure, but very substantially.
At the stroke of the midnight hour, when the world sleeps, India will awake to life
Jawaharlal Nehru
(1889-1964) born: Uttar
Pradesh. Prime Minister of
the interim government.
Lawyer and Congress
leader. Advocate of
socialism, democracy and
anti-imperialism. Later: First
Prime Minister of India.

and freedom. A moment comes, which comes but rarely in history, when we step
out from the old to the new, when an age ends, and when the soul of a nation,
long suppressed, finds utterance. It is fitting that at this solemn moment we take
the pledge of dedication to the service of India and her people and to the still
larger cause of humanity
Freedom and power bring responsibility. The responsibility rests upon this
Assembly, a sovereign body representing the sovereign people of India. Before the

Sar
ojini Naidu
Sarojini
(1879-1949)
born: Andhra Pradesh.
Poet, writer and political
activist. Among the
foremost women leaders in
the Congress. Later:
Governor of Uttar Pradesh.

birth of freedom we have endured all the pains of labour and our hearts are heavy
with the memory of this sorrow. Some of those pains continue even now. Nevertheless,
the past is over and it is the future that beckons to us now.
That future is not one of ease or resting but of incessant striving so that we
may fulfil the pledges we have so often taken and the one we shall take today. The
service of India means the service of the millions who suffer. It means the ending
of poverty and ignorance and disease and inequality of opportunity. The ambition

Somnath LLahiri
ahiri
(1901-1984) born: West
Bengal. Writer and editor.
Leader of the Communist
Party of India. Later:
Member of West Bengal
Legislative Assembly.

CHECK
YOUR
PROGRESS

of the greatest man of our generation has been to wipe every tear from every eye.
That may be beyond us, but as long as there are tears and suffering, so long our
work will not be over.
Read the three quotations above carefully.
Can you identify one idea that is common to all these three?
What are the differences in their ways of expressing that common idea?

CONSTITUTIONAL DESIGN

49

Philosophy of the
C onstitution

Values that inspired and guided the

freedom struggle and were in turn
nurtured by it, formed the
foundation for Indias democracy.
These values are embedded in the
Preamble
of
the
Indian
Constitution. They guide all the

articles of the Indian Constitution.

The Constitution begins with a short
statement of its basic values. This
is called the Preamble to the
constitution. Taking inspiration
from American model, most
countries in the contemporary
world have chosen to begin their
constitutions with a preamble.

in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic

tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and
secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and
establish thisConstitution for the United States of America.
We, the people of South Africa,
Recognise the injustices of our past;
Honour those who suffered for justice and freedom in our land;
Respect those who have worked to build and develop our country; and
Believe that South Africa belongs to all who live in it, united in our diversity.
We therefore, through our freely elected representatives, adopt this Constitution as the supreme law of
the Republic so as to
Heal the divisions of the past and establish a society based on democratic values, social justice and
fundamental human rights;
Lay the foundations for a democratic and open society in which government is based on the will of
the people and every citizen is equally protected by law;
Improve the quality of life of all citizens and free the potential of each person; and
Build a united and democratic South Africa able to take its rightful place as a sovereign state in the
family of nations.
May God protect our people.
Nkosi Sikelel iAfrika. Morena boloka setjhaba sa heso.
God sen Suid-Afrika. God bless South Africa.
Mudzimu fhatutshedza Afurika. Hosi katekisa Afrika.
50

DEMOCRATIC POLITICS

WE, THE PEOPLE

OF INDIA

The constitution has

been drawn up and
enacted by the people
through their
representatives, and
not handed down to
them by a king or any
outside powers.

Let us read the Preamble of our Constitution very

carefully and understand the meaning of each of its
key words.
The Preamble of the Constitution reads like a poem
on democracy. It contains the philosophy on which the
entire Constitution has been built. It provides a standard
to examine and evaluate any law and action of
government, to find out whether it is good or bad. It is
the soul of the Indian Constitution.

SO
VEREIGN
SOVEREIGN

People have supreme

right to make
decisions on internal
as well as external
matters. No external
power can dictate the
government of India.

REPUBLIC

The head of the state

is an elected person
and not a hereditary
position.

JUSTICE

Citizens cannot be
discriminated on the
grounds of caste,
religion and gender.
Social inequalities
have to be reduced.
Government should
work for the welfare
of all, especially of
the disadvantaged
groups.

LIBERTY

SOCIALIST

There are no
unreasonable
restrictions on the
citizens in what they
think, how they wish
to express their
thoughts and the way
they wish to follow up
their thoughts in
action.

Wealth is generated
socially and should
be shared equally by
society. Government
should regulate the
ownership of land and
industry to reduce
socio-economic
inequalities.

SECULAR

EQUALITY

Citizens have
complete freedom to
follow any religion.
But there is no official
religion. Government
treats all religious
beliefs and practices
with equal respect.

All are equal before

the law. The
traditional social
inequalities have to be
ended. The
government should
ensure equal
opportunity for all.

DEMOCRA
TIC
DEMOCRATIC

FRA
TERNITY
FRATERNITY

A form of government
where people enjoy
equal political rights,
elect their rulers and
hold them accountable. The government
is run according to
some basic rules.

All of us should
behave as if we are
members of the same
family. No one should
treat a fellow citizen
as inferior.

CONSTITUTIONAL DESIGN

51

Compare the Preambles to the constitutions of the United States of America, India and South Africa.
Make a list of ideas that are common to all these three.
Note down at least one of the major differences among these.
Which of the three makes a reference to the past?
Which of these does not invoke God?

Institutional design

A constitution is not merely a

statement of values and philosophy.
As we noted above, a constitution is
mainly about embodying these values
into institutional arrangements.
Much of the document called
Constitution of India is about these
arrangements. It is a very long and
detailed document. Therefore it needs
to be amended quite regularly to keep
it updated. Those who crafted the
Indian Constitution felt that it has to
be in accordance with peoples
aspirations and changes in society.
They did not see it as a sacred, static
and unalterable law. So, they made
provisions to incorporate changes
from time to time. These changes are
called constitutional amendments.
The Constitution describes the
institutional arrangements in a very
legal language. If you read the
Constitution for the first time, it can

be quite difficult to understand. Yet

the basic institutional design is not
very difficult to understand. Like any
Constitution,
the
Indian
Constitution lays down a procedure
for choosing persons to govern the
country. It defines who will have how
much power to take which decisions.
And it puts limits to what the
government can do by providing
some rights to the citizen that
cannot be violated. The remaining
three chapters in this book are about
these three aspects of the working
of Indian constitution. We shall look
at some key constitutional
provisions in each chapter and
understand how they work in
democratic politics. But this
textbook will not cover all the salient
features of the institutional design
in the Indian Constitution. Some
other aspects will be covered in your
textbook next year.

Apartheid: The official policy of racial separation and ill treatment of blacks
followed by the government of South Africa between 1948 and 1989.
Clause: A distinct section of a document.
Constituent Assembly: An assembly of peoples representatives that writes
a constitution for a country.
Constitution: Supreme law of a country, containing fundamental rules
governing the politics and society in a country.
Constitutional amendment: A change in the constitution made by the
supreme legislative body in a country.
Draft: A preliminary version of a legal document.
Philosophy: The most fundamental principles underlying ones thoughts
and actions.
Preamble: An introductory statement in a constitution which states the
reasons and guiding values of the constitution.
Treason: The offence of attempting to overthrow the government of the
state to which the offender owes allegiance.
Tryst: A meeting or meeting place that has been agreed upon.
52

DEMOCRATIC POLITICS

CHECK
YOUR
PROGRESS

GLOSSARY

exercises
1

Here are some false statements. Identify the mistake in each case
and rewrite these correctly based on what you have read in this
chapter.
a Leaders of the freedom movement had an open mind about whether
the country should be democratic or not after independence.
b Members of the Constituent Assembly of India held the same views
on all provisions of the Constitution.
c A country that has a constitution must be a democracy.
d Constitution cannot be amended because it is the supreme law of
a country.

Which of these was the most salient underlying conflict in the making of a democratic constitution in South Africa?
a Between South Africa and its neighbours
b Between men and women
c Between the white majority and the black minority
d Between the coloured minority and the black majority

Which of these is a provision that a democratic constitution does not

have?
a Powers of the head of the state
b Name of the head of the state
c Powers of the legislature
d Name of the country

Match the following

Constitution:
a Motilal Nehru
b B.R. Ambedkar
c Rajendra Prasad
d Sarojini Naidu

leaders with their roles in the making of the

i
ii
iii
iv

President of the Constituent Assembly

Member of the Constituent Assembly
Chairman of the Drafting Committee
Prepared a Constitution for India in 1928

Read again the extracts from Nehrus speech Tryst with Destiny
and answer the following:
a Why did Nehru use the expression not wholly or in full measure
in the first sentence?
b What pledge did he want the makers of the Indian Constitution to
take?
c The ambition of the greatest man of our generation has been to wipe
every tear from every eye. Who was he referring to?

Here are some of the guiding values of the Constitution and their
meaning. Rewrite them by matching them correctly.
a Sovereign
i Government will not favour any religion.
b Republic
ii People have the supreme right to make decisions.
c Fraternity
iii Head of the state is an elected person.
d Secular
iv People should live like brothers and sisters.

CONSTITUTIONAL DESIGN

53

A friend from Nepal has written you a letter describing the political
situation there. Many political parties are opposing the rule of the
king. Some of them say that the existing constitution given by the
monarch can be amended to allow more powers to elected
representatives. Others are demanding a new Constituent Assembly
to write a republican constitution. Reply to your friend giving your
opinions on the subject.

Here are different opinions about what made India a democracy.

How much importance would you give to each of these factors?
a Democracy in India is a gift of the British rulers. We received training
to work with representative legislative institutions under the British
rule.
b Freedom Struggle challenged the colonial exploitation and denial
of different freedoms to Indians. Free India could not be anything
but democratic.
c We were lucky to have leaders who had democratic convictions.
The denial of democracy in several other newly independent
countries shows the important role of these leaders.

Read the following extract from a conduct book for married women,
published in 1912. God has made the female species delicate and fragile
both physically and emotionally, pitiably incapable of self-defence. They are
destined thus by God to remain in male protection of father, husband and son
all their lives. Women should, therefore, not despair, but feel obliged that they
can dedicate themselves to the service of men. Do you think the values

expressed in this para reflected the values underlying our

constitution? Or does this go against the constitutional values?
10

Read the following statements about a constitution. Give reasons

why each of these is true or not true.
a The authority of the rules of the constitution is the same as that of
any other law.
b Constitution lays down how different organs of the government will
be formed.
c Rights of citizens and limits on the power of the government are
laid down in the constitution.
d A constitution is about institutions, not about values

Follow the newspapers for any report on a discussion on any constitutional

amendment or demand for any constitutional amendment. You could, for
example, focus on the demand for constitutional amendment for reservation
for women in legislatures. Was there a public debate? What reasons were
put forward in favour of the amendment? How did different parties react to
the constitutional amendment? Did the amendment take place?

54

DEMOCRATIC POLITICS

exercises

55

Nehru Memorial Museum and Library, New Delhi

CHAPTER 4

Electoral
Politics

OVERVIEW
In Chapter Two we have seen that in a democracy it is neither possible nor
necessary for people to govern directly. The most common form of
democracy in our times is for the people to govern through their
representatives. In this chapter we will look at how these representatives
are elected. We begin by understanding why elections are necessary and
useful in a democracy. We try to understand how electoral competition
among parties serves the people. We then go on to ask what makes an
election democratic. The basic idea here is to distinguish democratic
elections from non-democratic elections.
The rest of the chapter tries to assess elections in India in the light of
this yardstick. We take a look at each stage of elections, from the drawing
of boundaries of different constituencies to the declaration of results. At
each stage we ask what should happen and what does happen in elections.
Towards the end of the chapter, we turn to an assessment of whether
elections in India are free and fair. Here we also examine the role of the
Election Commission in ensuring free and fair elections.
56

DEMOCRATIC POLITICS

4.1 WHY ELECTIONS?

A ssembly Ele
Elecc tion in
H a rryy ana
Do most leaders
fulfil their election
promises?

The time is after midnight. An expectant

crowd sitting for the past five hours in a
chowk of the town is waiting for its leader
to come. The organisers assure and reassure the crowd that he would be here any
moment. The crowd stands up whenever
a passing vehicle comes that way . It
arouses hopes that he has come.
The leader is Mr . Devi Lal, chief of
the Haryana Sangharsh Samiti, who was
to address a meeting in Karnal onThursday night. The 76-year-old leader, is a
very busy man these days. His day starts
at 8 a.m. and ends after 1 1 p.m. he
had already addressed nine election
meetings since morning been constantly addressing public meetings for
the past 23 months and preparing for this
election.

This newspaper report is about the

State assembly election in Haryana
in 1987. The State had been ruled by
a Congress party led government
since 1982. Chaudhary Devi Lal, then
an opposition leader, led a movement
called Nyaya Yudh (Struggle for
Justice) and formed a new party, Lok
Dal. His party joined other opposition
parties to form a front against the
Congress in the elections. In the
election campaign, Devi Lal said that
if his party won the elections, his

CHECK
YOUR
PROGRESS

government would waive the loans of

farmers and small businessmen. He
promised that this would be the first
action of his government.
The people were unhappy with the
existing government. They were also
attracted by Devi Lals promise. So,
when elections were held, they voted
overwhelmingly in favour of Lok Dal
and its allies. Lok Dal and its
partners won 76 out of 90 seats in
the State Assembly. Lok Dal alone
won 60 seats and thus had a clear
majority in the Assembly. The
Congress could win only 5 seats.
Once the election results were
announced, the sitting Chief
Minister resigned. The newly elected
Members of Legislative Assembly
(MLAs) of Lok Dal chose Devi Lal as
their leader. The Governor invited
Devi Lal to be the new Chief
Minister. Three days after the
election results were declared, he
became the Chief Minister. As soon
as he became the Chief Minister, his
Government issued a Government
Order waiving the outstanding loans
of small farmers, agricultural
labourers and small businessmen.
His party ruled the State for four
years. The next elections were held
in 1991. But this time his party did
not win popular support. The
Congress won the election and
formed the government.

Jagdeep and Navpreet read this story and drew the following conclusions. Can you say which of
these are right or wrong (or if the information given in the story is inadequate to call them right or
wrong):
Elections can lead to changes in the policy of the government.
The Governor invited Devi Lal to become the Chief Minister because he was impressed with his
speeches.
People are unhappy with every ruling party and vote against it in the next election.
The party that wins the election forms the government.
This election led to a lot of economic development in Haryana.
The Congress Chief Minister need not have resigned after his party lost elections.
ELECTORAL POLITICS

57

A C T I V I T Y
Do you know when the last Assembly election
was held in your state? Which other elections
have taken place in your locality in the last five
years? Write down the level of elections (National,
Assembly, Panchayat, etc.), when were they held
and the name and designation (MP, MLA, etc.) of
the persons who got elected from your area.

W h y do w
wee nee
needd ele
elecc tions?

Elections take place regularly in any

democracy. We noted in Chapter
One that there are more than one
hundred countries in the world in
which elections take place to choose
peoples representatives. We also
read that elections are held in many
countries that are not democratic.
But why do we need elections?
Let us try to imagine a democracy
without elections. A rule of the
people is possible without any
elections if all the people can sit
together everyday and take all the
decisions. But as we have already
seen in Chapter Two, this is not
possible in any large community.
Nor is it possible for everyone to
have the time and knowledge to
take decisions on all matters.
Therefore in most democracies
people rule through their
representatives.
Is there a democratic way of
selecting representatives without
elections? Let us think of a place
where representatives are selected
on the basis of age and experience.
Or a place where they are chosen
on the basis of education or
knowledge. There could be some
difficulty in deciding on who is more
experienced or knowledgable. But let
us say the people can resolve these
difficulties. Clearly, such a place
does not require elections.
58

But can we call this place a

democracy? How do we find out if
the people like their representatives
or not? How do we ensure that these
representatives rule as per the
wishes of the people? How to make
sure that those who the people dont
like do not remain their
representatives? This requires a
mechanism by which people can
choose their representatives at
regular intervals and change them
if they wish to do so. This
mechanism is called election.
Therefore, elections are considered
essential in our times for any
representative democracy.
In an election the voters make
many choices:
They can choose who will make
laws for them.
They can choose who will form the
government and take major
decisions.
They can choose the party whose
policies will guide the government
and law making.

W h aatt mak
es an ele
makes
elecc tion
democr
democraa tic?

Elections can be held in many ways.

All democratic countries hold
elections. But most non-democratic
countries also hold some kind of
elections. How do we distinguish
democratic elections from any other
election? We have discussed this
question briefly in Chapter Two. We
discussed many examples of
countries where elections are held
but they cant really be called
democratic elections. Let us recall
what we learnt there and start with
a simple list of the minimum
conditions of a democratic election:
First, everyone should be able to
choose. This means that everyone
should have one vote and every
vote should have equal value.
DEMOCRATIC POLITICS

We have seen why

democracies need
to have elections.
But why do rulers
in non-democratic
countries need to
hold elections?

 Second,

there should be
something to choose from. Parties
and candidates should be free to
contest elections and should offer
some real choice to the voters.
Third, the choice should be offered
at regular intervals. Elections must
be held regularly after every few
years.
Fourth, the candidate preferred by
the people should get elected.
Fifth,
elections should be
conducted in a free and fair
manner where people can choose
as they really wish.
These might look like very simple
and easy conditions. But there are
many countries where these are not
fulfilled. In this chapter we will apply
these conditions to the elections held
in our own country to see if we can
call these democratic elections.

I s it good ttoo ha
havv e political
c ompetition?

Ah! So, elections

are like exams
where politicians
and parties know if
they have passed
or failed. But who
are the examiners?

Elections are thus all about political

competition. This competition takes
various forms. The most obvious form
is the competition among political
parties. At the constituency level, it
takes the form of competition among
several candidates. If there is no
competition, elections will become
pointless.
But is it good to have political
competition? Clearly, an electoral
competition has many demerits. It
creates a sense of disunity and
factionalism in every locality. You
would have heard of people
complaining of party-politics in your
locality. Different political parties and
leaders often level allegations against
one another. Parties and candidates
often use dirty tricks to win elections.
Some people say that this pressure
to win electoral fights does not allow
sensible long-term policies to be
formulated. Some good people who
ELECTORAL POLITICS

may wish to serve the country do not

enter this arena. They do not like the
idea of being dragged into unhealthy
competition.
Our Constitution makers were
aware of these problems. Yet they
opted for free competition in
elections as the way to select our
future leaders. They did so because
this system works better in the long
run. In an ideal world all political
leaders know what is good for the
people and are motivated only by a
desire to serve them. Political
competition is not necessary in such
an ideal world. But that is not what
happens in real life. Political leaders
all over the world, like all other
professionals, are motivated by a
desire to advance their political
careers. They want to remain in
power or get power and positions for
themselves.They may wish to serve
the people as well, but it is risky to
depend entirely on their sense of
duty. Besides even when they wish
to serve the people, they may not
know what is required to do so, or
their ideas may not match what the
people really want.
How do we deal with this real life
situation? One way is to try and
improve the knowledge and character
of political leaders. The other and
more realistic way is to set up a
system where political leaders are
rewarded for serving the people and
punished for not doing so. Who
decides this reward or punishment?
The simple answer is: the people.
This is what electoral competition
does. Regular electoral competition
provides incentives to political
parties and leaders. They know that
if they raise issues that people want
to be raised, their popularity and
chances of victory will increase in
the next elections. But if they fail to
satisfy the voters with their work
they will not be able to win again.
59

customers. If he does not, the

customer will go to some other shop.
Similarly, political competition may
cause divisions and some ugliness,
but it finally helps to force political
parties and leaders to serve the
people.

read
the
cartoon

Irfan Khan

So if a political party is motivated

only by desire to be in power, even
then it will be forced to serve the
people. This is a bit like the way
market works. Even if a shopkeeper
is interested only in his profit, he is
forced to give good service to the

Read these two cartoons carefully. Write the message of each of them in
your own words. Have a discussion in class on which of the two is closer
to the reality in your own locality. Draw a cartoon to depict what elections
do to the relationship between voters and political leaders.

4.2 WHAT IS OUR SYSTEM

Can we say that Indian elections are
democratic? To answer this question,
let us take a look at how elections are
held in India. Lok Sabha and Vidhan
Sabha (Assembly) elections are held
regularly after every five years. After
five years the term of all the elected
representatives comes to an end. The
Lok Sabha or Vidhan Sabha stands
dissolved. Elections are held in all
constituencies at the same time,
either on the same day or within a
few days. This is called a general
election. Sometimes election is held
only for one constitutency to fill the
vacancy caused by death or
resignation of a member. This is
60

OF

ELECTIONS?

called a by-election. In this chapter

we will focus on general elections.

Ele
al cconstituencies
onstituencies
Elecc to rral

You read about the people of

Haryana electing 90 MLAs. You may
have wondered how they did that.
Did every person in Haryana vote for
all the 90 MLAs? You perhaps know
that this is not the case. In our
country we follow an area based
system of representation. The
country is divided into different
areas for purposes of elections.
These areas are called electoral
constitutencies. The voters who live
in an area elect one representative.
DEMOCRATIC POLITICS

For Lok Sabha elections, the country

is divided into 543 constituencies.
The representative elected from each
constituency is called a Member of
Parliament or an MP. One of the
features of a democratic election is
that every vote should have equal
value. That is why our Constitution
requires that each constituency
should have a roughly equal
population living within it.
Similarly, each state is divided into
a specific number of Assembly
constituencies. In this case, the
elected representative is called the
Member of Legislative Assembly or
an MLA. Each Parliamentary
GULBARGA LOK SABHA CONSTITUENCY

constituency has within it several

assembly constituencies. The same
principle applies for Panchayat and
Municipal elections. Each village or
town is divided into several wards
that are like constituencies. Each
ward elects one member of the
village or the urban local body.
Sometimes these constituencies are
counted as seats, for each
constituency represents one seat in
the assembly. When we say that Lok
Dal won 60 seats in Haryana, it
means that candidates of Lok Dal
won in 60 assembly constituencies
in the state and thus Lok Dal had
60 MLAs in the state assembly.
GULBARGA DISTRICT IN KARNATAKA

ALAND
CHINCHOLI
AFZALPUR

GULBARGA

GULBARGA
CHITAPUR
SHAHBAD
SEDAM

JEVARGI
GURMITKAL
YADGIR

DISTRICT BOUNDARY
BOUNDARIES OF ASSEMBLY CONSTITUENCIES
AREA WITHIN DISTRICT BUT OUTSIDE
LOK SABHA CONTITUENCY
GULBARGA
LOK SABHA CONTITUENCY

ELECTORAL POLITICS

Why is the boundary of the Gulbarga Lok Sabha

constituency not the same as the district

boundary of Gulbarga? Draw a similar map
for your own Lok Sabha constituency.
How many Assembly constituencies are there
in the Gulbarga Lok Sabha constituency? Is it
the same in your own Lok Sabha
constituency?

61

R eser
onstituencies
eservv e d CConstituencies

Our Constitution entitles every citizen

to elect her/his representative and to
be elected as a representative. The
Constitution makers, however, were
worried that in an open electoral
competition, certain weaker sections
may not stand a good chance to get
elected to the Lok Sabha and the state
Legislative Assemblies. They may not
have the required resources,
education and contacts to contest and
win elections against others. Those
who are influential and resourceful
may prevent them from winning
elections. If that happens, our
Parliament and Assemblies would be
deprived of the voice of a significant
section of our population. That would
make
our
democracy
less
representative and less democratic.
So, the makers of our Constitution
thought of a special system of
reserved constituencies for the
weaker sections. Some constituencies
are reserved for people who belong
to the Scheduled Castes [SC] and
Scheduled Tribes [ST]. In a SC
reserved constituency only someone
who belongs to the Scheduled
Castes can stand for election.
Similarly only those belonging to the
Scheduled Tribes can contest an
election from a constituency
reserved for ST. Currently, in the
Lok Sabha, 84 seats are reserved for
the Scheduled Castes and 47 for the
Scheduled Tribes (as on 1 September
2012). This number is in proportion
to their share in the total population.
Thus the reserved seats for SC and
ST do not take away the legitimate
share of any other social group.
This system of reservation
was extended later to other
weaker sections at the district and
local level. In many states, seats
in rural (panchayat) and urban
(municipalities and corporations)
62

local bodies are now reserved for

Other Backward Classes (OBC) as
well. However, the proportion of
seats reserved varies from state to
state. Similarly, one-third of the
seats are reserved in rural and
urban local bodies for women
candidates.

Vo tters
ers
ers list

Once the constituencies are decided,

the next step is to decide who can
and who cannot vote. This decision
cannot be left to anyone till the last
day. In a democratic election, the list
of those who are eligible to vote
is prepared much before the
election and given to everyone. This
list is officially called the Electoral
Roll and is commonly known as the
Voters List.
This is an important step for it is
linked to the first condition of a
democratic election: everyone
should get an equal opportunity to
choose representatives. In Chapter
One we read about the principle of
universal adult franchise. In practice
it means that everyone should have
one vote and each vote should have
equal value. No one should be
denied the right to vote without a
good reason. Different citizens differ
from one another in many ways:
some are rich, some are poor; some
are highly educated, some are not
so educated or not educated at all;
some are kind, others are not so
kind. But all of them are human
beings with their own needs and
views. That is why all of them
deserve to have an equal say in
decisions that affect them.
In our country, all the citizens aged
18 years and above can vote in an
election. Every citizen has the right
to vote, regardless of his or her caste,
religion or gender. Some criminals
and persons with unsound mind can
DEMOCRATIC POLITICS

Like in Panchayats,
should we not have
at least one-third
seats in the
parliament and
assemblies
reserved for
women?

LOK SABHA CONSTITUENCIES

TOTAL CONSTITUENCIES

543

GENERAL

412

RESERVED (SC)

84

RESERVED (ST)

47

Election Commission of India

STATES CONSTITUENCIES

See the map above and answer the following questions.

What is the number of Lok Sabha constituencies in your state and the
neighbouring two states?
Which states have more than 30 Lok Sabha constituencies?
Why do some states have such a large number of constituencies?
Why are some constituencies small in area while others are very big?
Are the constituencies reserved for the SCs and STs evenly spread all
over the entire country or are there more in some areas?
ELECTORAL POLITICS

Andhra Pradesh
Arunachal Pradesh
Assam
Bihar
Chhattisgarh
Goa
Gujarat
Haryana
Himachal Pradesh
Jammu & Kashmir
Jharkhand
Karnataka
Kerala
Madhya Pradesh
Maharashtra
Manipur
Meghalaya
Mizoram
Nagaland
Odisha
Punjab
Rajasthan
Sikkim
Tamil Nadu

25
2
14
40
11
2
26
10
4
6
14
28
20
29
48
2
2
1
1
21
13
25
1
39

Telangana
Tripura
Uttar Pradesh
Uttarakhand
West Bengal

17
2
80
5
42

UNION TERRITORIES
Andaman & Nicobar
Islands
Chandigarh
Dadra & Nagar Haveli
Daman & Diu
Delhi
Lakshadweep
Puducherry

1
1
1
1
7
1
1

63

be denied the right to vote, but only

in rare situations. It is the
responsibility of the government to
get the names of all the eligible
voters put on the voters list. As new
persons attain voting age names are
added to the voters list. Names of
those who move out of a place or
those who are dead are deleted. A
complete revision of the list takes
place every five years. This is done
to ensure that it remains up to date.
In the last few years a new system
of Election Photo Identity Card
[EPIC] has been introduced. The
government has tried to give this
card to every person on the voters
list. The voters are required to carry
this card when they go out to vote,
so that no one can vote for someone
else. But the card is not yet
compulsory for voting. For voting,
the voters can show many other
proofs of identity like the ration card
or the driving licence.

N omina
tion of candida
omination
candidatte s

We noted above that in a democratic

election people should have a real
choice. This happens only when
there are almost no restrictions on
anyone to contest an election. This
is what our system provides. Anyone who can be a voter can also become a candidate in elections. The
only difference is that in order to be
a candidate the minimum age is 25
years, while it is only 18 years for
being a voter. There are some other
restrictions on criminals etc. but
these apply in very extreme cases.
Political parties nominate their candidates who get the party symbol
and support. Partys nomination is
often called party ticket.
Every person who wishes to
contest an election has to fill a
nomination form and give some
money as security deposit.
64

Recently, a new system of

declaration has been introduced on
direction from the Supreme Court.
Every candidate has to make a legal
declaration, giving full details of :
Serious criminal cases pending
against the candidate;
Details of the assets and liabilities
of the candidate and his or her
family; and
Education qualifications of the
candidate.
This information has to be made
public. This provides an opportunity
to the voters to make their decision
on the basis of the information
provided by the candidates.

Educational qualifications for

candidates
Why is there no educational qualification for
holding such an important position when some
kind of educational qualification is needed for any
other job in the country?
Educational qualifications are not relevant to
all kinds of jobs. The relevant qualification for
selection to the Indian cricket team, for
example, is not the attainment of educational
degrees but the ability to play cricket well.
Similarly the relevant qualification for being an
MLA or an MP is the ability to understand
peoples concerns, problems and to represent
their interests. Whether they can do so or not
is examined by lakhs of examiners their
voters after every five years.
Even if education was relevant, it should be
left to the people to decide how much
impor tance they give to educational
qualifications.
In our countr y putting an educational
qualification would go against the spirit of
democracy for yet another reason. It would
mean depriving a majority of the countrys
citizens the right to contest elections. If, for
example, a graduate degree like B.A., B.Com
or B.Sc was made compulsory for candidates,
more than 90 per cent of the citizens will
become ineligible to contest elections.
DEMOCRATIC POLITICS

Why are the

candidates
required to give a
detailed statement
of their property?

Chief Electoral Officer, Mizoram

ELECTORAL POLITICS

65

Match the following features of our electoral system with the principles they reflect.
Principles
Features of election system
Universal adult franchise
Representation of
weaker sections

Each constituency has roughly the same population

Everyone who is 18 years of age or older has a right to vote

Open political competition

One vote one value

Election Campaign

The main purpose of election is to

give people a chance to choose the
representatives, the government and
the policies they prefer. Therefore it
is necessary to have a free and open
discussion about who is a better
representative, which party will
make a better government or what
is a good policy. This is what happens
during election campaigns.
In our country such campaigns
take place for a two-week period
between the announcement of the
final list of candidates and the date
of polling. During this period the
candidates contact their voters,
political leaders address election
meetings and political parties
mobilise their supporters. This is
also the period when newspapers
and television news are full of
election related stories and debates.
But election campaign is not limited
to these two weeks only. Political
parties start preparing for elections
months before they actually take
place.

A C T I V I T Y
What was the election campaign like in your
constituency in the last Lok Sabha elections?
Prepare a list of what the candidates and parties
said and did.

66

Anyone can form a party or contest elections

Reservation of seats for the SCs and the STs

In election campaigns, political

parties try to focus public attention
on some big issues. They want to
attract the public to that issue and
get them to vote for their party on that
basis. Let us look at some of the
successful slogans given by different
political parties in various elections.
The Congress party led by Indira
Gandhi gave the slogan of Garibi
Hatao (Remove poverty) in the
Lok Sabha elections of 1971. The
party promised to reorient all the
policies of the government to
remove poverty from the country.
Save Democracy was the slogan
given by Janata Party in the next
Lok Sabha election held in 1977.
The party promised to undo the
excesses committed during
Emergency and restore civil liberties.
The Left Front used the slogan of
Land to the Tiller in the West
Bengal Assembly elections held in
1977.
Protect the Self-Respect of the
Telugus was the slogan used by
N. T. Rama Rao, the leader of the
Telugu Desam Party in Andhra
Pradesh Assembly elections in
1983.
In a democracy it is best to leave
political parties and candidates free
to conduct their election campaigns
the way they want to. But it is
sometimes necessary to regulate
campaigns to ensure that every
political party and candidate gets a
DEMOCRATIC POLITICS

CHECK
YOUR
PROGRESS

fair and equal chance to compete.

According to our election law, no
party or candidate can:
Bribe or threaten voters;
Appeal to them in the name of
caste or religion;
Use government resources for
election campaign; and
Spend more than Rs. 25 lakh in a
constituency for a Lok Sabha election
or Rs. 10 lakh in a constituency in
an Assembly election.
If they do so, their election can be
rejected by the court even after they
have been declared elected. In
addition to the laws, all the political
parties in our country have agreed
to a Model Code of Conduct for
election campaigns. According to
this, no party or candidate can:
Use any place of worship for
election propaganda;

Draw a cartoon here about the Model Code of Conduct

for the guidance of political parties and candidates
during elections.

Use

government vehicles, aircrafts

and officials for elections; and
Once elections are announced,
Ministers shall not lay foundation
stones of any projects, take any big
policy decisions or make any
promises of providing public facilities.

Polling and ccoun

oun
ting of vvot
ot
ounting
otee s
The final stage of an election is the
day when the voters cast or poll
their vote. That day is usually called
the election day. Every person whose
name is on the voters list can go to
a nearby polling booth, situated
usually in a local school or a
government office. Once the voter
goes inside the booth, the election
officials identify her, put a mark on
her finger and allow her to cast her
vote. An agent of each candidate is
allowed to sit inside the polling booth
and ensure that the voting takes
place in a fair way.

Are the elections too expensive

for our country?
A large amount of money is spent in conducting
elections in India. For instance, the government
spent about Rs.1,300 crores in conducting Lok
Sabha elections in 2004. That works out to about
Rs. 20 per person on the voters list. The amount
spent by parties and candidates was more than
what the government spent. Roughly speaking,
the expenditure made by government, parties and
candidates was around Rs. 3,000 crores or Rs. 50
per voter.
Some people say that elections are a burden
on our people, that our poor country cannot afford
to hold elections once every five years. Let us
compare this expenditure with some other figures:
In 2005, our government decided to buy six
nuclear submarines from France. Each submarine cost about Rs. 3,000 crores.
Delhi hosted the Commonwealth Games in
2010. The estimate for its cost is more than
Rs. 10,000 crores.
Are the elections too expensive? You decide.

ELECTORAL POLITICS

67

Election result in Gulbarga

Let us go back to our example of Gulbarga. In 2004, a total of 11 candidates contested elections in that
constituency. The total eligible voters were 14.39 lakhs. Of these 8.28 lakh voters had cast their
votes. The candidate of the Congress party, Iqbal Ahmed Saradgi secured about 3.12 lakh votes.
This was only about 38 percent of the total votes polled. But since he had secured more votes than
anyone else, he was declared elected a Member of Parliament from Gulbarga Lok Sabha constituency.
Election Result of Gulbarga constituency, GENERAL ELECTION TO LOK SABHA, 2004
CANDIDATE
PARTY
VOTES POLLED
% OF VOTES
Iqbal Ahmed Saradgi
INC
37.76
312432
Basawaraj Patil Sedam
BJP
30.82
254548
Vithal Heroor
JD(S)
22.84
189001
Suryakant Nimbalkar
BSP
3.23
26723
Sanganna
IND
1.84
15212
Arun Kumar Chandrashekara Patil
KNDP
0.86
7155
Bhagavanreddy B
IND
0.82
6748
4268
Hamid Pasha Sarmast
MUL
0.52
Basawanth Rao Revansiddappa Sheelwanth AIFB
0.47
3900
3671
Sandesh C Bandak
USYP
0.44
Umesh Havanoor
SP
0.41
3380
What is the percentage of voters who had actually cast their votes?
To win an election is it necessary for a person to secure more than half the votes polled?

Earlier the voters used to indicate

who they wanted to vote for by putting
a stamp on the ballot paper. A ballot
paper is a sheet of paper on which
the names of the contesting
candidates along with party name
and symbols are listed. Nowadays
electronic voting machines (EVM) are
used to record votes. The machine
shows the names of the candidates
and the party symbols. Independent
candidates too have their own
symbols, allotted by election officials.
Al the voter has to do is to press the
button against the name of the
candidate she wants to give her vote.
Once the polling is over, all the
EVMs are sealed and taken to a

secure place. A few days later, on a

fixed date, all the EVMs from a
constituency are opened and the
votes secured by each candidate are
counted. The agents of all candidates
are present there to ensure that the
counting is done properly. The
candidate who secures the highest
number of votes from a constituency
is declared elected. In a general
election, usually the counting of votes
in all the constituencies takes place
at the same time, on the same day.
Television channels, radio and
newspapers report this event. Within
a few hours of counting, all the results
are declared and it becomes clear as
to who will form the next government.

Identify the fair and the unfair electoral practices among the following:
A minister flags off a new train in his constituency a week before polling day.
A candidate promises that she will get a new train for her constituency if she is elected.
Supporters of a candidate take the voters to a temple and make them take an oath that they will
vote for him.
The supporters of a candidate distribute blankets in slums in return for a promise for vote.

68

Why are party

agents present in
the polling booth
and the counting
centre?

DEMOCRATIC POLITICS

CHECK
YOUR
PROGRESS

4.3 WHAT MAKES ELECTIONS IN INDIA

DEMOCRATIC?
the judiciary enjoys.
We get to read a lot about unfair
practices in elections. Newspapers
and television reports often refer to
such allegations. Most of these
reports are about the following:
Inclusion of false names and
exclusion of genuine names in the
voters list;
Misuse of government facilities
and officials by the ruling party;
Excessive use of money by rich
candidates and big parties; and
Intimidation of voters and rigging
on the polling day.
Many of these reports are correct.
We feel unhappy when we read or
see such reports. But fortunately
they are not on such a scale so as to
defeat the very purpose of elections.
This becomes clear if we ask a basic
question: Can a party win an
election and come to power not
because it has popular support but
through electoral malpractices? This
is a vital question. Let us carefully
examine various aspects of this
question.

Independen
Independentt Ele
Elecc tion
C ommission

Why does the

Election
Commission have
so much powers?
Is this good for
democracy?

One simple way of checking whether

elections are fair or not is to look at
who conducts the elections. Are they
independent of the government? Or
can the government or the ruling party
influence or pressurise them? Do they
have enough powers to be able to
conduct free and fair elections? Do
they actually use these powers?
The answer to all these questions
is quite positive for our country. In
our country elections are conducted
by an independent and very powerful
Election Commission (EC). It enjoys
the same kind of independence that
ELECTORAL POLITICS

The Chief
Election Commissioner (CEC) is
appointed by the President of India.
But once appointed, the Chief
Election Commissioner is not
answerable to the President or the
government. Even if the ruling party
or the government does not like what
the Commission does, it is virtually
impossible for it to remove the CEC.
Very few election commissions in
the world have such wide-ranging
powers as the Election Commission
of India.
EC takes decisions on every aspect
of conduct and control of elections
from the announcement of elections
to the declaration of results.
It implements the Code of Conduct
and punishes any candidate or
party that violates it.
During the election period, the EC
can order the government to follow
some guidelines, to prevent use and
misuse of governmental power to
enhance its chances to win
elections, or to transfer some
government officials.
When on election duty, government
officers work under the control of
the EC and not the government.
In the last fifteen years or so, the
Election Commission has begun to
exercise all its powers and even
expand them. It is very common now
for the Election Commission to
reprimand the government and
administration for their lapses. When
election officials come to the opinion
that polling was not fair in some booths
or even an entire constituency, they
order a repoll. The ruling parties often
do not like what the EC does. But they
have to obey. This would not have
happened if the EC was not
independent and powerful.
69

EC issues notification constituting 14th

Lok Sabha
EC tightens norms for poll expenses

Photo I-cards not mandatory in Biha

r
polls

CHECK
YOUR
PROGRESS

EC accepts new Haryana DGP

EC will seek power to censure
political ads

ew poll

again, revi
EC to visit Gujarat
arrangements

EC says no immediate plan to ban

Exit Polls

HC asks EC to bar criminal netas

EC shoots down HM advic
e on
poll reforms

EC orders repoll in

398 more booths

EC to keep closer eye on hidden

poll costs

Read these headlines carefully and identify which powers are used by the Election Commission in each
instance to ensure free and fair elections.

P opular par
ticipa
tion
participa
ticipation

Another way to check the quality of

the election process is to see
whether people participate in it with
enthusiasm. If the election process
is not free or fair, people will not
continue to participate in the
exercise. Now, read these charts
and draw some conclusions about
participation in India:

1 Peoples participation in election

is usually measured by voter
turnout figures. Turnout indicates
the per cent of eligible voters who
actually cast their vote. Over the
last fifty years, the turnout in
Europe and North America has
declined. In India the turnout has
either remained stable or actually
gone up.

1 VOTER TURNOUT IN INDIA AND THE UK

90

VOTER TURNOUT (%)

80

UK
INDIA

78
72

70
60
50

56

58

62

60

59

58

61

40
30
20
10
1991

2005

ELECTION YEAR

70

DEMOCRATIC POLITICS

2 In India the poor, illiterate and

underprivileged people vote in
larger proportion as compared to
the rich and privileged sections.
This is in contrast to western
democracies. For example in the
United States of America, poor
people, African Americans and
Hispanics vote much less than the
rich and the white people.

4 THOSE WHO PARTICIPATED IN ANY

ELECTION RELATED ACTIVITY IN INDIA

2 VOTER TURNOUT IN INDIA AND US BY SOCIAL GROUPS, 2004

INDIA
60

56

58

US
60

61

60

Source: National Election Study 1996-2004, CSDS.

56

50
40

40

28

30

(%)

VOTER TURNOUT (%)

70

4 The interest of voters in electionrelated activities has been

increasing over the years. During
the 2004 elections, more than onethird voters took part in a
campaign-related activities. More
than half of the people identified
themselves as being close to one
or the other political party. One out
of every seven voters is a member
of a political party.

20

32

30
20

21
8

13

10

10
Upper
Caste

OBC

SC

ST

White

Black

Hispanic

SOCIAL GROUPS
Source: Figures for India
from National Election
Study 2004, CSDS.
Figures for US from
National Election Study
2004, University of
Michigan.

3 DO YOU THINK YOUR VOTE MAKES A DIFFERENCE?

18%
Has no effect
Dont know

ELECTORAL POLITICS

1999

2004

A C T I V I T Y
Ask the eligible voters in your family whether they
voted in the last election to the Lok Sabha or to
the state assembly. If they did not, ask them why
did they not vote. If they did, ask them which
party and candidate they voted for and why. Also
ask them whether they had participated in any
other election-related activity like attending an
election meeting or rally etc.

A c cceptanc
eptanc
eptancee of ele
elecc tion
outcc ome
out

15%

Source: National Election

Study 2004, CSDS.

1998

ELECTION YEAR

3 Common people in India attach a

lot of importance to elections. They
feel that through elections they
can bring pressure on political
parties to adopt policies and
programmes favourable to them.
They also feel that their vote
matters in the way things are run
in the country.

Has effect

1996

67%

One final test of the free and fairness

of election has in the outcome itself.
If elections are not free or fair, the
outcome always favours the powerful.
In such a situation, the ruling parties
do not lose elections. Usually, the
71

All this leads to a simple conclusion:

elections in India are basically free
and fair. The party that wins an election and forms government does so
because people have chosen it over
its rivals. This may not be true for
every constituency. A few candidates
may win purely on the basis of
money power and unfair means. But
the overall verdict of a general election still reflects popular preference.
There are very few exceptions to this
rule in the last fifty years in our
country. This is what makes Indian
elections democratic.
Yet the picture looks different if we
ask deeper questions: Are peoples
preferences based on real knowledge?
Are the voters getting a real choice?
Is election really level playing field
for everyone? Can an ordinary
citizen hope to win elections?
72

The leader is coming out of a press

conference: What was the need to say that we
have distributed tickets only amongst suitable
and winnable family relations? Do you think
that family politics is confined to only a few
states or parties?

Questions of this kind bring the

many limitations and challenges of
Indian elections to our attention.
These include :

read
the
cartoon
Titled Electoral
Campaigns, this
cartoon was drawn in
the Latin American
context. Does this
apply to India
and to other
democracies
in the world?
Nerilicon, El Economista, Cagle Cartoons Inc.

C hallenges ttoo fr
ee and fair
free
ele
elecc tions

Irfan Khan

losing party does not accept the

outcome of a rigged election.
The outcome of Indias elections
speaks for itself:
The ruling parties routinely lose
elections in India both at the
national and state level. In fact in
every two out of the three elections
held in the last fifteen years, the
ruling party lost.
In the US, an incumbent or sitting
elected representative rarely loses
an election. In India about half of
the sitting MPs or MLAs lose
elections.
Candidates who are known to have
spent a lot of money on buying
votes and those with known
criminal connections often lose
elections.
Barring
very few disputed
elections, the electoral outcomes
are usually accepted as peoples
verdict by the defeated party.

DEMOCRATIC POLITICS

read
the
cartoon

R.K. Laxman, The Times of India

Is this an accurate
picture of what
happens to the voter
before and after
elections? Must this
always happen in a
democracy? Can you
think of examples
when this did not
happen?

Candidates

and parties with a lot

of money may not be sure of their
victory but they do enjoy a big and
unfair advantage over smaller
parties and independents.
In some parts of the country,
candidates with criminal connection
have been able to push others out
of the electoral race and to secure a
ticket from major parties.
Some families tend to dominate
political parties; tickets are
distributed to relatives from these
families.
Very often elections offer little
choice to ordinary citizens, for
both the major parties are quite

similar to each other both in

policies and practice.
Smaller parties and independent
candidates suffer a huge
disadvantage compared to bigger
parties.
These challenges exist not just in
India but also in many established
democracies. These deeper issues
are a matter of concern for those
who believe in democracy. That is
why citizens, social activists and
organisations have been demanding
reforms in our electoral system. Can
you think of some reforms? What
can an ordinary citizen do to face
these challenges?

Here are some facts on Indian elections. Comment on each of these to say whether they reflect the
strength or the weakness of our electoral system:

CHECK
YOUR
PROGRESS

The Lok Sabha has had less than 10 per cent women members till 2009.
The

Election Commission often refuses to accept the governments advice about when the elections should be held.
The 14th Lok Sabha has more than 145 members whose assets are more than Rs.1 crore.
After losing an election the Chief Minister said: I respect the peoples verdict.
ELECTORAL POLITICS

73

Booth capturing: Supporters or hired musclemen of party or a candidate

gain physical control of a polling booth and cast false votes by
threatening everyone or by preventing genuine voters from reaching
the polling booth.
Code of Conduct: A set of norms and guidelines to be followed by political
parties and contesting candidates during election time.
Constituency: Voters in a geographical area who elect a representative to
the legislative bodies.
Incumbent: The current holder of a political office. Usually the choice for
the voters in elections is between the incumbent party or candidate and
those who oppose them.
Level playing field: Condition in which all parties and candidates contesting
in an election have equal opportunities to appeal for votes and to carry out
election campaign.
Rigging: Fraud and malpractices indulged by a party or candidate to increase
its votes. It includes stuffing ballot boxes by a few persons using the votes of
others; recording multiple votes by the same person; and bribing or coercing
polling officers to favour a candidate.
Turnout: The percentage of eligible voters who cast their votes in an election.
1

Which of the following statements about the reasons for conducting

elections are false?
a Elections enable people to judge the performance of the government.
b People select the representative of their choice in an election.
c Elections enable people to evaluate the performance of the judiciary.
d People can indicate which policies they prefer.

Which of these is not a good reason to say that Indian elections are
democratic?
a India has the largest number of voters in the world.
b Indias Election Commission is very powerful.
c In India, everyone above the age of 18 has a right to vote.
d In India, the losing parties accept the electoral verdict.

Match the following :

It is necessary to keep the voters

list up to date because
Some constituencies are
reserved for SCs and STs so
that
Everyone has one and only one
vote so that

b
c
d

74

Party in power is not allowed to

use government vehicles
because

i
ii
iii
iv

there is a fair representation of

all sections of our society
everyone
has
equal
opportunity to elect their
representative
all candidates must have a fair
chance of competing in
elections
some people may have moved
away from the area where they
voted last

DEMOCRATIC POLITICS

GLOSSARY

exercises

exercises
4

List all the different election related activities mentioned in the chapter
and arrange them in a time sequence, beginning with the first activity
and ending with the last. Some of these activities are given below:
releasing election manifestos; counting of votes; making of voters
list; election campaign; declaration of election results; casting of votes;
ordering of re-poll; announcing election schedule; filing nomination.

Surekha is an officer in-charge of ensuring free and fair elections in

an assembly constituency in a state. Describe what should she focus
on for each of the following stages of election:
a Election campaign
b Polling day
c Counting day

The table below gives the proportion of different communities among

the candidates who won elections to the US Congress. Compare these
to the proportion of these communities in the population of the US.
Based on this, would you suggest a system of reservations in the US
Congress? If yes, why and for which communities? If no, why not?

Blacks
Hispanics
Whites

Proportion of the community

(in per cent) in the
House of
Population of US
representatives
8
13
5
13
86
70

Can we draw the following conclusions from the information given

in this chapter? Give two facts to support your position for each of
these.
a Election Commission of India does not have enough powers to
conduct free and fair elections in the country.
b There is a high level of popular participation in the elections in
our country.
c It is very easy for the party in power to win an election.
d Many reforms are needed to make our elections completely free
and fair.

Chinappa was convicted for torturing his wife for dowry. Satbir was
held guilty of practicing untouchability. The court did not allow either
of them to contest elections. Does this decision go against the
principles of democratic elections?

Here are some reports of electoral malpractices from different parts of

the world. Is there anything that these countries can learn from India
to improve their elections? What would you suggest in each case?
a During an election in Nigeria, the officer in charge of counting
votes deliberately increased the votes of one candidate and declared

ELECTORAL POLITICS

75

him elected. The court later found out that more than five lakh
votes cast for one candidate were counted in favour of another.
b Just before elections in Fiji, a pamphlet was distributed warning
voters that a vote for former Prime Minister, Mahendra Chaudhry
will lead to bloodshed. This was a threat to voters of Indian origin.
c In the US, each state has its own method of voting, its own
procedure of counting and its own authority for conducting
elections. Authorities in the state of Florida took many controversial
decisions that favoured Mr. Bush in the presidential elections in
2000. But no one could change those decisions.
10

Here are some reports of malpractices in Indian elections. Identify

what the problem in each case is. What should be done to correct the
situation?
a Following the announcement of elections, the minister promised
to provide financial aid to reopen the closed sugar mill.
b Opposition parties alleged that their statements and campaign
was not given due attention in Doordarshan and All India Radio.
c An inquiry by the Election Commission showed that electoral rolls
of a state contain name of 20 lakh fake voters.
d The hoodlums of a political party were moving with guns, physically
preventing supporters of other political parties to meet the voters
and attacking meetings of other parties.

11

Ramesh was not in class when this chapter was being taught. He
came the next day and repeated what he had heard from his father.
Can you tell Ramesh what is wrong with these statements?
a Women always vote the way men tell them to. So what is the point
of giving them the right to vote?
b Party politics creates tension in society. Elections should be decided
by consensus not by competition.
c Only graduates should be allowed to stand as candidates for
elections.

Assembly elections are usually held every year in a few states of the country.
You can collect information about the elections that take place during this
session. While collecting news items, divide these into three parts:
Important events that took place before the election main agenda
discussed by political parties; information about peoples demand;
role of the Election Commission.
Important events on the day of the election and counting turnout
in elections; reports of malpractice; re-polls; the types of predictions
made; and the final outcome.
Post elections reasons offered by political parties for winning or
losing elections; analysis of the election verdict by the media;
selection of the Chief Minister.

76

DEMOCRATIC POLITICS

exercises

77

CHAPTER 5

Working of
Institutions

OVERVIEW
Democracy is not just about people electing their rulers. In a democracy
the rulers have to follow some rules and procedures. They have to work
with and within institutions. This chapter is about the working of such
institutions in a democracy. We try to understand this by looking at the
manner in which major decisions are taken and implemented in our
country. We also look at how disputes regarding these decisions are
resolved. In this process we come across three institutions that play a key
role in major decisions legislature, executive and judiciary.
You have already read something about these institutions in earlier
classes. Here we shall quickly summarise those and move on to asking
larger questions. In the case of each institution we ask: What does this
institution do? How is this institution connected to other institutions?
What makes its functioning more or less democratic? The basic objective
here is to understand how all these institutions together carry on the
work of government. Sometimes we compare these with similar institutions
in other democracies. In this chapter we take our examples from the
working of the national level government called Central Government, Union
Government, or just Government of India. While reading this chapter, you
can think of and discuss examples from the working of the government in
your state.
78

DEMOCRATIC POLITICS

5.1 HOW

IS A

MAJOR POLICY DECISION TAKEN?

A GGoo v e rrnmen
nmen
der
nmentt Or
Order

On August 13, 1990, the Government

of India issued an Order. It was
called an Office Memorandum. Like
all government orders, it had a number and is known by that: O. M. No.
36012/31/90-Est (SCT), dated
13.8.1990. The Joint Secretary, an
officer in the Department of Personnel and Training in the Ministry of
Personnel, Public Grievances and

WORKING

OF

INSTITUTIONS

Pensions, signed the Order. It was

quite short, barely one page. It
looked like any ordinary circular or
notice that you may have seen in
school. The government issues hundreds of orders every day on different matters. But this one was very
important and became a source of
controversy for several years. Let us
see how the decision was taken and
what happened later.

79

This Order announced a major

policy decision. It said that 27 per
cent of the vacancies in civil posts
and services under the Government
of India are reserved for the Socially
and Educationally Backward Classes
(SEBC). SEBC is another name for all
those people who belong to castes
that are considered backward by the
government. The benefit of job reservation was till then available only
to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled
Tribes. Now a new third category
called SEBC was introduced. Only
persons who belong to backward
classes were eligible for this quota
of 27 per cent jobs. Others could not
compete for these jobs.

T he D
ers
Dee cision M
Maa kkers

Who decided to issue this

Memorandum? Clearly, such a big
decision could not have been taken
by the person who signed that
document. The officer was merely
implementing the instructions given
by the Minister of Personnel, Public
Grievances and Pensions, of which
the Department was a part. We can
guess that such a major decision
would have involved other major
functionaries in our country. You
have already read in the previous
class about some of them. Let us go
over some of the main points that
you covered then:
President is the head of the state
and is the highest formal authority
in the country.
Prime Minister is the head of the
government and actually exercises
all governmental powers. He takes
most of the decisions in the
Cabinet meetings.
Parliament
consists of the
President and two Houses, Lok
Sabha and Rajya Sabha. The Prime
Minister must have the support of
a majority of Lok Sabha members.
80

So, were all these people involved

in this decision regarding the Office
Memorandum? Let us find out.

A C T I V I T Y
Which points, other than the ones mentioned
above, do you recall about these institutions
from the previous class? Discuss in class.
Can you think of a major decision made by
your state government? How were the Governor, the Council of Ministers, the state assembly and the courts involved in that decision?

This Office Memorandum was the

culmination of a long chain of
events. The Government of India had
appointed the Second Backward
Classes Commission in 1979. It was
headed by B.P. Mandal. Hence it was
popularly called the Mandal
Commission. It was asked to
determine the criteria to identify the
socially and educationally backward
classes in India and recommend
steps to be taken for their
advancement. The Commission gave
its Report in 1980 and made many
recommendations. One of these was
that 27 per cent of government jobs
be reserved for the socially and
educationally backward classes.
The Report and recommendations
were discussed in the Parliament.
For
several
years,
many
parliamentarians and parties kept
demanding the implementation of
the Commissions recommendations.
Then came the Lok Sabha election
of 1989. In its election manifesto,
the Janata Dal promised that if voted
to power, it would implement the
Mandal Commission report. The
Janata Dal did form the government
after this election. Its leader V. P.
Singh became the Prime Minister.
Several developments took place
after that:
DEMOCRATIC POLITICS

Is every Office
Memorandum a
major political
decision? If not,
what made this
one different?

Now I can see

clearly! That is why
they talk of
Mandalisation of
politics. Dont they?

 The

read
the
ima
ge
image
Reservation debate
was such an
important issue during
1990-91 that
advertisers used this
theme to sell their
products. Can you
spot some references
to political events and
debates in these Amul
Butter hoardings?

GCMMF India

President of India in his

address to the Parliament
announced the intention of the
government to implement the
recommendations of the Mandal
Commission.
On 6 August 1990, the Union
Cabinet took a formal decision to
implement the recommendations.
Next day Prime Minister V.P. Singh
informed the Parliament about
this decision through a statement
in both the Houses of Parliament.
The decision of the Cabinet was
sent to the Department of Personnel
and Training. The senior officers of
the Department drafted an order in
line with the Cabinet decision and
took the ministers approval. An
officer signed the order on behalf of
the Union Government. This was
how O.M. No. 36012/ 31/90 was
born on August 13, 1990.
For the next few months, this was
the most hotly debated issue in the
country. Newspapers and magazines

WORKING

OF

INSTITUTIONS

were full of different views and

opinions on this issue. It led to
widespread protests and counterprotests, some of which were violent.
People reacted strongly because this
decision affected thousands of job
opportunities. Some felt that
existence of inequalities among
people of different castes in India
necessitated job reservations. They
felt, this would give a fair
opportunity to those communities
who so far had not adequately been
represented
in
government
employment.
Others felt that this was unfair as
it would deny equality of opportunity
to those who did not belong to
backward communities. They would
be denied jobs even though they
could be more qualified. Some felt
that this would perpetuate caste
feelings among people and hamper
national unity. In this chapter we
wont discuss whether the decision
was good or not. We only take this
example to understand how major
decisions
are
taken
and
implemented in the country.
Who resolved this dispute? You
know that the Supreme Court and the
High Courts in India settle disputes
arising out of governmental decisions.
Some persons and associations
opposed to this order filed a number
of cases in the courts. They appealed
to the courts to declare the order
invalid and stop its implementation.
The Supreme Court of India bunched
all these cases together. This case was
known as the Indira Sawhney and
others Vs Union of India case. Eleven
judges of the Supreme Court heard
arguments of both sides. By a
majority, the Supreme Court judges
in 1992 declared that this order of the
Government of India was valid. At
the same time the Supreme Court
asked the government to modify its
81

original order. It said that well-todo persons among the backward

classes should be excluded from
getting the benefit of reservation.
Accordingly, the Department of

Personnel and Training issued

another Office Memorandum on
September 8, 1993. The dispute
thus came to an end and this policy
has been followed since then.

Who did what in this case of reservations for backward classes?

Supreme Court
Made formal announcement about this decision
Cabinet

President

Government
Officials

N e eedd ffoo r PPolitical

olitical Institutions

We have seen one example of how the

government works. Governing a
country involves various such
activities. For example, the government
is responsible for ensuring security to
the citizens and providing facilities for
education and health to all. It collects
taxes and spends the money thus
raised on administration, defence and
development
programmes.
It
formulates and implements several
welfare schemes. Some persons have
to take decisions on how to go about
these activities. Others have to
implement these decisions. If
disputes arise on these decisions or
in their implementation, there should
be some one to determine what is
right and what is wrong. It is
important that everyone should
know who is responsible for doing
what. It is also important that these
activities keep taking place even if
the persons in key positions change.
So, to attend to all these
tasks, several arrangements are
made in all modern democracies.
Such arrangements are called
institutions. A democracy works well
when these institutions perform
functions assigned to them. The
Constitution of any country lays
down basic rules on the powers and
82

Implemented the decision by issuing an order

Took the decision to give 27% job reservations
Upheld reservations as valid

functions of each institution. In the

example above we saw several such
institutions at work.
The Prime Minister and the
Cabinet are institutions that take
all important policy decisions.
The Civil Servants, working
together, are responsible for
taking steps to implement the
ministers decisions.
Supreme Court is an institution
where disputes between citizens
and the government are finally
settled.
Can you think of some other institutions in this example? What is
their role?
Working with institutions is not
easy. Institutions involve rules and
regulations. This can bind the hands
of leaders. Institutions involve
meetings, committees and routines.
This often leads to delays and
complications. Therefore dealing
with institutions can be frustrating.
One might feel that it is much better
to have one person take all decisions
without any rules, procedures and
meetings. But that is not the spirit
of democracy. Some of the delays
and complications introduced by
institutions are very useful. They
provide an opportunity for a wider
set of people to be consulted in any
decision. Institutions make it
DEMOCRATIC POLITICS

CHECK
YOUR
PROGRESS

Which institutions
are at work in the
running of your
school? Would it
be better if one
person alone took
all the decisions
regarding
management of
your school?

difficult to have a good decision

taken very quickly. But they also
make it equally difficult to rush

through a bad decision. That is why

democratic governments insist on
institutions.

5.2 PARLIAMENT

Irfan Khan

In the example of the Office

Memorandum, do you remember
the role of the Parliament? Perhaps
not. Since this decision was not
taken by the Parliament, you might
think that the Parliament had no
role in it. But let us go back to the
story and see whether Parliament
figures in it. Let us recall the points
made earlier by completing the
following sentences:
The
Report of the Mandal
Commission was discussed
The President of India mentioned
this in his
The Prime Minister made a
The decision was not directly taken
in the Parliament. But Parliamentary
discussions on the Report influenced
and shaped the decision of the
government. They brought pressure
on the government to act on the
Mandal recommendation. If the
Parliament was not in favour of this
decision, the Government could not
have gone ahead with it. Can you
guess why? Recall what you read
about the Parliament in the earlier

WORKING

OF

INSTITUTIONS

class and try to imagine what the

Parliament could have done if it did
not approve of the Cabinets
decision.

W h y do w
wee nee
needd a
Pa rrliamen
liamen
liamentt ?

In all democracies, an assembly of

elected representatives exercises
supreme political authority on
behalf of the people. In India such a
national assembly of elected
representatives is called Parliament.
At the state level this is called
Legislature or Legislative Assembly.
The name may vary in different
countries, but such an assembly
exists in every democracy. It
exercises political authority on
behalf of the people in many ways:
1 Parliament is the final authority for
making laws in any country. This
task of law making or legislation
is so crucial that these assemblies
are called legislatures. Parliaments
all over the world can make new
laws, change existing laws, or
abolish existing laws and make
new ones in their place.
2 Parliaments all over the world
exercise some control over those
who run the government. In some
countries like India this control is
direct and full. Those who run the
government can take decisions
only so long as they enjoy support
of the Parliament.
3 Parliaments control all the money
that governments have. In most
countries any the public money
can be spent only when the
Parliament sanctions it.
83

4 Parliament is the highest forum of

discussion and debate on public
issues and national policy in any
country. Parliament can seek
information about any matter.

Tw o H
ouses of PPaa rrliamen
liamen
Houses
liamentt

Since the Parliament plays a central

role in modern democracies, most
large countries divide the role and
powers of the Parliament in two
parts. They are called Chambers or
Houses. One House is usually
directly elected by the people and
exercises the real power on behalf
of the people. The second House is
usually elected indirectly and
performs some special functions.
The most common work for the
second House is to look after the
interests of various states, regions
or federal units.
In our country, the Parliament
consists of two Houses. The two
Houses are known as the Council of
States (Rajya Sabha) and the House
of the People (Lok Sabha). The
President of India is a part of the
Parliament, although she is not a
member of either House. That is why
all laws made in the Houses come
into force only after they receive the
assent of the President.
You have read about the Indian
Parliament in earlier classes. From
the Chapter Four you know how Lok
Sabha elections take place. Let us
recall some key differences between
the composition of these two Houses
of Parliament. Answer the following
for the Lok Sabha and the Rajya
Sabha:
What is the total number of
members?
Who elects the members?
What is the length of the term (in
years)?
Can the House be dissolved or is
it permanent?
84

Which of the two Houses is more

powerful? It might appear that the
Rajya Sabha is more powerful, for
sometimes it is called the Upper
Chamber and the Lok Sabha the
Lower Chamber. But this does not
mean that Rajya Sabha is more
powerful than Lok Sabha. This is
just an old style of speaking and not
the language used in our
Constitution.
Our Constitution does give the
Rajya Sabha some special powers
over the states. But on most matters,
the Lok Sabha exercises supreme
power. Let us see how:
1 Any ordinary law needs to be
passed by both the Houses. But if
there is a difference between the
two Houses, the final decision is
taken in a joint session in which
members of both the Houses sit
together. Because of the larger
number of members, the view of
the Lok Sabha is likely to prevail
in such a meeting.
2 Lok Sabha exercises more powers
in money matters. Once the Lok
Sabha passes the budget of the
government or any other money
related law, the Rajya Sabha
cannot reject it. The Rajya Sabha
can only delay it by 14 days or
suggest changes in it. The Lok
Sabha may or may not accept
these changes.

A C T I V I T Y
When the Parliament is in session, there is a special programme everyday on Doordarshan about
the proceedings in Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha.
Watch the proceedings or read about it in the
newspapers and note the following:
Powers of the two Houses of Parliament.
Role of the Speaker.
Role of the Opposition.
DEMOCRATIC POLITICS

What is the point in

having so much
debate and
discussion in the
Parliament when
we know that the
view of the ruling
party is going to
prevail?

3 Most importantly, the Lok Sabha

controls the Council of Ministers.
Only a person who enjoys the
support of the majority of the
members in the Lok Sabha is
appointed the Prime Minister. If the

majority of the Lok Sabha members

say they have no confidence in the
Council of Ministers, all ministers
including the Prime Minister, have
to quit. The Rajya Sabha does not
have this power.

A day in the life of the Lok Sabha

7 December 2004 was an ordinary day in the life of
the Fourteenth Lok Sabha. Let us take a look at what
happened in the course of that day. Identify the role
and powers of the parliament on the basis of the
proceedings for the day as given below. You can
also enact this day in your classroom.
11:00 Various ministries gave
written answers to about 250
questions that were asked by
members. These included:
What is the governments policy on talking to
militant groups in Kashmir?
What are the figures of atrocities against
Scheduled Tribes, including those inflicted by
the police?
What is the government doing about overpricing of medicines by big companies?
12:00 A large number of official
documents were presented and were
available for discussion. These
included:
Recruitment rules for the Indo-Tibetan Border
Police Force
Annual Repor t of the Indian Institute of
Technology, Kharagpur
Report and accounts of Rashtriya Ispat Nigam
Limited, Visakhapatnam
12:02 The Minister of Development
of North Eastern Region made a
statement regarding Revitalisation of
the North Eastern Council.
The Minister of State for Railways presented a
statement showing the grant needed by the

WORKING

OF

INSTITUTIONS

Railways in addition to that sanctioned in the

Railway Budget.
The Minister of Human Resource Development
introduced the National Commission for Minority
Educational Institutions Bill, 2004. He also gave
a statement explaining why the government had
to bring an ordinance for this.
12:14 Several members highlighted
some issues, including:
The

vindictiveness of the Central Bureau of

Investigation (CBI) in registering cases against
some leaders in the Tehelka case.
Need to include Rajasthani as an official
language in the Constitution.
Need to renew the insurance policies of
farmers and agricultural workers of Andhra
Pradesh.
2:26 Two bills proposed by the
government were considered and
passed. These were:
The Securities Laws (Amendment) Bill
The Enforcement of Security Interest and
Recovery of Debts Laws (Amendment) Bill
4:00 Finally, there was a long
discussion regarding the foreign
policy of the government and the
need to continue an independent
foreign policy in the context of the
situation in Iraq.
7:17 Discussion concluded. House
adjourned for next day.

85

5.3 POLITICAL EXECUTIVE

Do you remember the story of the
Office Memorandum with which we
started this chapter? We found out
that the person who signed the
document did not take this decision.
He was only executing the policy
decision taken by someone else. We
noted the role of the Prime Minister
in taking that decision. But we also
know that he could not have taken
that decision if he did not have
support from the Lok Sabha. In that
sense he was only executing the
wishes of the Parliament.
Thus, at different levels of any
government we find functionaries
who take day-to-day decisions but
do not exercise supreme power on
behalf of the people. All those
functionaries are collectively known
as the executive. They are called
executive because they are in charge
of the execution of the policies of
the government. Thus, when we talk
about the government we usually
mean the executive.

Political and PPee rrmanen

manen
manentt
E x e c utiv
utivee

In a democratic country, two

categories make up the executive.
One that is elected by the people for
a specific period, is called the
political executive. Political leaders
who take the big decisions fall in this
category. In the second category,
people are appointed on a long-term
basis. This is called the permanent
executive or civil services. Persons
working in civil services are called
civil servants. They remain in office
even when the ruling party changes.
These officers work under political
executive and assist them in
carrying out the day-to-day
administration. Can you recall the
role of political and non-political
86

executive in the case of the Office

Memorandum?
You might ask: Why does the
political executive have more power
than the non-political executive?
Why is the minister more powerful
than the civil servant? The civil
servant is usually more educated
and has more expert knowledge of
the subject. The advisors working in
the Finance Ministry know more
about economics than the Finance
Minister. Sometimes the ministers
may know very little about the
technical matters that come under
their ministry. This could easily
happen in ministries like Defence,
Industry, Health, Science and
Technology, Mining, etc. Why should
the minister have the final say on
these matters?
The reason is very simple. In a
democracy the will of the people is
supreme. The minister is elected by
the people and thus empowered to
exercise the will of the people on
their behalf. She is finally
answerable to the people for all the
consequences of her decision. That
is why the minister takes all the final
decisions. The minister decides the
overall framework and objectives in
which decisions on policy should be
made. The minister is not, and is not
expected to be, an expert in the
matters of her ministry. The minister
takes the advice of experts on all
technical matters. But very often
experts hold different opinions or
place before her more than one
option. Depending on what the
overall objective is, the minister
decides.
Actually this happens in any large
organisation. Those who understand
the overall picture take the most
important decisions, not the experts.
DEMOCRATIC POLITICS

The experts can tell the route, but

someone with a larger view decides
the destination. In a democracy
elected ministers perform this role.

P r ime M
inist
er and CCouncil
ouncil
Minist
inister
of M
inist
ers
Minist
inisters

read
the
cartoon

Shankar. Dont Spare Me

The race to become

minister is not new.
Here is a cartoon
depicting ministerial
aspirants waiting to
get a berth in Nehrus
Cabinet after the
1962 elections. Why
do you think political
leaders are so keen to
become ministers?

Prime Minister is the most important

political institution in the country.
Yet there is no direct election to the
post of the Prime Minister. The
President appoints the Prime
Minister. But the President cannot
appoint anyone she likes. The
President appoints the leader of the
majority party or the coalition of
parties that commands a majority
in the Lok Sabha, as Prime Minister.
In case no single party or alliance
gets a majority, the President
appoints the person most likely to
secure a majority support. The
Prime Minister does not have a fixed
tenure. He continues in power so
long as he remains the leader of the
majority party or coalition.

WORKING

OF

INSTITUTIONS

After the appointment of the Prime

Minister, the President appoints
other ministers on the advice of the
Prime Minister. The Ministers are
usually from the party or the
coalition that has the majority in the
Lok Sabha. The Prime Minister is
free to choose ministers, as long as
they are members of Parliament.
Sometimes, a person who is not a
member of Parliament can also
become a minister. But such a
person has to get elected to one of
the Houses of the Parliament within
six months of appointment as
minister.
Council of Ministers is the official
name for the body that includes all
the Ministers. It usually has 60 to
80 Ministers of different ranks.
Cabinet Ministers are usually
top-level leaders of the ruling party
or parties who are in charge of the
major ministries. Usually the
Cabinet Ministers meet to take
decisions in the name of the
Council of Ministers. Cabinet is
thus the inner ring of the Council
of Ministers. It comprises about 20
ministers.
Ministers of State with independent charge are usually in-charge
of smaller Ministries. They
participate in the Cabinet meetings only when specially invited.
Ministers of State are attached
to and required to assist Cabinet
Ministers.
Since it is not practical for all
ministers to meet regularly and
discuss everything, the decisions are
taken in Cabinet meetings. That is why
parliamentary democracy in most
countries is often known as the
Cabinet form of government. The
Cabinet works as a team. The
ministers may have different views
and opinions, but everyone has to own
up to every decision of the Cabinet.
87

A C T I V I T Y
List the names of five Cabinet Ministers and
their ministries each at the Union level and in
your state.
Meet the Mayor or Municipal Chairperson of
your town or the President of Zila Parishad of
your district and ask him or her about how the
city, town or district is administered.

Po w ers of the
P r ime M
inist
Minist
inistee r

The Constitution does not say very

much about the powers of the Prime
Minister or the ministers or their
relationship with each other. But as
head of the government, the Prime
Minister has wide ranging powers.
He chairs Cabinet meetings. He
coordinates the work of different
Departments. His decisions are final
in case disagreements arise between
Departments. He exercises general
supervision of different ministries.
All ministers work under his
leadership. The Prime Minister
distributes and redistributes work
to the ministers. He also has the
power to dismiss ministers. When
the Prime Minister quits, the entire
ministry quits.
Thus, if the Cabinet is the most
powerful institution in India, within
the Cabinet it is the Prime Minister
88

R.K. Laxman, The Times of India

No minister can openly criticise

any decision of the government,
even if it is about another Ministry
or Department. Every ministry has
secretaries, who are civil servants.
The secretaries provide the
necessary background information
to the ministers to take decisions.
The Cabinet as a team is assisted
by the Cabinet Secretariat. This
includes many senior civil servants
who try to coordinate the working of
different ministries.

who is the most powerful. The

powers of the Prime Minister in all
parliamentary democracies of the
world have increased so much in
recent decades that parliamentary
democracies are some times seen as
Prime
Ministerial
form
of
government. As political parties have
come to play a major role in politics,
the Prime Minister controls the
Cabinet and Parliament through the
party. The media also contributes to
this trend by making politics and
elections as a competition between
top leaders of parties. In India too
we have seen such a tendency
towards the concentration of powers
in the hands of the Prime Minister.
Jawaharlal Nehru, the first Prime
Minister of India, exercised
enormous authority because he had
great influence over the public.
Indira Gandhi was also a very
powerful leader compared to her
colleagues in the Cabinet. Of course,
the extent of power wielded by a
Prime Minister also depends on the
personality of the person holding
that position.
However, in recent years the rise
of coalition politics has imposed
certain constraints on the power of
the Prime Minister. The Prime
DEMOCRATIC POLITICS

read
the
cartoon
This cartoon depicts
a cabinet meeting
chaired by Prime
Minister Indira Gandhi
in early 1970s, at the
peak of her popularity.
Do you think similar
cartoons could be
drawn about other
prime ministers who
followed her?

Minister of a coalition government

cannot take decisions as he likes.
He has to accommodate different
groups and factions in his party as
well as among alliance partners. He
also has to heed to the views and
positions of the coalition partners
and other parties, on whose support
the survival of the government
depends.

Why does this

book refer to the
President as she?
Have we ever had
a woman President
in our country?

T he PPrr esiden
esidentt

Press Information Bureau

Did you protest

when the book
referred to the
Prime Minister as
he? Have we not
had a woman
Prime Minister?
Why should we
assume that all the
important positions
are held by men?

While the Prime Minister is the head

of the government, the President is
the head of the State. In our political
system the head of the State exercises
only nominal powers. The President
of India is like the Queen of Britain
whose functions are to a large extent
ceremonial. The President supervises
the overall functioning of all the
political institutions in the country so
that they operate in harmony to
achieve the objectives of the State.
The President is not elected directly

by the people. The elected Members

of Parliament (MPs) and the elected
Members of the Legislative
Assemblies (MLAs) elect her. A
candidate standing for Presidents
post has to get a majority of votes to
win the election. This ensures that
the President can be seen to represent
the entire nation. At the same time
the President can never claim the kind
of direct popular mandate that the
Prime Minister can. This ensures that
she remains only a nominal executive.
The same is true of the powers of
the President. If you casually read the
Constitution you would think that
there is nothing that she cannot do.
All governmental activities take place
in the name of the President. All laws
and major policy decisions of
the government are issued in her
name. All major appointments are
made in the name of the President.
These include the appointment of

The President,
Shri Pranab Mukherjee
administering the oath of
office of the Prime Minister
to Shri Narendra Modi, at a
Swearing-in Ceremony, at
Rashtrapati Bhavan on
26 May 2014.

WORKING

OF

INSTITUTIONS

89

the Chief Justice of India, the

Judges of the Supreme Court and
the High Courts of the states, the
Governors of the states, the Election
Commissioners, ambassadors to
other countries, etc. All international
treaties and agreements are made in
the name of the President. The
President
is
the
supreme
commander of the defence forces of
India.
But we should remember that the
President exercises all these powers
only on the advice of the Council of
Ministers. The President can ask the
Council of Ministers to reconsider its
advice. But if the same advice is
given again, she is bound to act
according to it. Similarly, a bill
passed by the Parliament becomes
a law only after the President gives
assent to it. If the President wants,
she can delay this for some time and
send the bill back to the Parliament
for reconsideration. But if the
Parliament passes the bill again, she
has to sign it.
So you may wonder what does the
President really do? Can she do
anything on her own at all? There is
one very important thing she should
do on her own: appoint the Prime
Minister. When a party or coalition
of parties secures a clear majority
in the elections, the President, has
to appoint the leader of the majority
party or the coalition that enjoys

majority support in the Lok Sabha.

When no party or coalition gets a
majority in the Lok Sabha, the
President exercises her discretion.
The President appoints a leader who
in her opinion can muster majority
support in the Lok Sabha. In such a
case, the President can ask the
newly appointed Prime Minister to
prove majority support in the Lok
Sabha within a specified time.

The Presidential System

Presidents all over the world are not always nominal executives like the President of India. In many
countries of the world, the President is both the
head of the state and the head of the government. The President of the United States of
America is the most well known example of this
kind of President. The US President is directly
elected by the people. He personally chooses and
appoints all Ministers. The law making is still done
by the legislature (called the Congress in the US),
but the president can veto any law. Most importantly, the president does not need the support
of the majority of members in the Congress and
neither is he answerable to them. He has a fixed
tenure of four years and completes it even if his
party does not have a majority in the Congress.
This model is followed in most of the countries of Latin America and many of the ex-Soviet
Union countries. Given the centrality of the President, this system of government is called the
Presidential form of government. In countries like
ours that follow the British model, the parliament
is supreme. Therefore our system is called the
parliamentary system of government.

Eliamma, Annakutti and Marymol read the section on the President. Each of them had a question. Can
you help them in answering these questions?
Eliamma: What happens if the President and the Prime Minister disagree about some policy? Does
the view of the Prime Minister always prevail?
Annakutti: I find it funny that the President is the Supreme Commander of Armed Forces. I doubt if the
President can even lift a heavy gun. What is the point in making the President the Commander?
Marymol: I would say, what is the point in having a President at all if all the real powers are with the
Prime Minister?
90

read
the
ima
ge
image

DEMOCRATIC POLITICS

What is better for a

democracy: A
Prime Minister who
can do whatever
he wishes or a
Prime Minister who
needs to consult
other leaders and
parties?

CHECK
YOUR
PROGRESS

5.4 THE JUDICIARY

Let us return, one final time, to the
story of Office Memorandum that we
started with. This time let us not
recall the story, but imagine how
different the story could have been.
Remember, the story came to a
satisfactory end because the
Supreme Court gave a verdict that
was accepted by everyone. Imagine
what would have happened in the
following situations:
If there was nothing like a
Supreme Court in the country.
Even if there was a Supreme
Court, if it had no power to judge
actions of the government.
Even if it had the power, if no one
trusted the Supreme Court to give
a fair verdict.
Even if it gave a fair judgement, if
those who appealed against the
Government Order did not accept
the judgement.

M.E. Cohen, National, Cagle Cartoons Inc.

It is quite common in
the US for judges to
be nominated on the
basis of well-known
political opinions and
affiliations. This
fictitious
advertisement
appeared in the US in
2005 when President
Bush was considering
various candidates for
nomination to the US
supreme court. What
does this cartoon say
about the
independence of the
judiciary? Why do
such cartoons not
appear in our
country? Does this
demonstrate the
independence of our
judiciary?

WORKING

OF

INSTITUTIONS

A C T I V I T Y
Follow the news about any major court case in a
High Court or the Supreme Court. What was the
original verdict? Did the High Court or the
Supreme Court change it? What was the reason?

This is why an independent and

powerful judiciary is considered
essential for democracies. All the
courts at different levels in a country
put together are called the judiciary.
The Indian judiciary consists of a
Supreme Court for the entire nation,
High Courts in the states, District
Courts and the courts at local level.
India has an integrated judiciary. It
means the Supreme Court controls
the judicial administration in the
country. Its decisions are binding on
all other courts of the country. It can
take up any dispute
Between citizens of the country;
Between citizens and government;
Between two or more state
governments; and
Between governments at the union
and state level.
It is the highest court of appeal in
civil and criminal cases. It can hear
appeals against the decisions of the
High Courts.
Independence of the judiciary
means that it is not under the
control of the legislature or the
executive. The judges do not act on
the direction of the government or
according to the wishes of the party
in power. That is why all modern
democracies have courts that are
independent of the legislature and
the executive. India has achieved
this. The judges of the Supreme
Court and the High Courts are
appointed by the President on the
91

advice of the Prime Minister and in

consultation with the Chief Justice of
the Supreme Court. In practice it now
means that the senior judges of the
Supreme Court select the new judges
of the Supreme Court and the High
Courts. There is very little scope for
interference by the political executive.
The senior most judge of the Supreme
Court is usually appointed the Chief
Justice. Once a person is appointed
as judge of the Supreme Court or the
High Court it is nearly impossible to
remove him or her from that position.
It is as difficult as removing the
President of India. A judge can be
removed only by an impeachment
motion passed separately by twothirds members of the two Houses of
the Parliament. It has never happened
in the history of Indian democracy.
The judiciary in India is also one
of the most powerful in the world.
The Supreme Court and the High
Courts have the power to interpret
the Constitution of the country. They
can declare invalid any law of the
legislature or the actions of the
executive, whether at the Union
level or at the state level, if they find
such a law or action is against the

Constitution. Thus they can

determine the Constitutional
validity of any legislation or action
of the executive in the country,
when it is challenged before them.
This is known as the judicial review.
The Supreme Court of India has also
ruled that the core or basic
principles of the Constitution cannot
be changed by the Parliament.
The powers and the independence
of the Indian judiciary allow it to act
as the guardian of the Fundamental
Rights. We shall see in the next
chapter that the citizens have a
right to approach the courts to seek
remedy in case of any violation of
their rights. In recent years the
Courts have given several
judgments and directives to protect
public interest and human rights.
Any one can approach the courts if
public interest is hurt by the actions
of government. This is called public
interest litigation. The courts
intervene to prevent the misuse of
the governments power to make
decisions. They check malpractices
on the part of public officials. That is
why the judiciary enjoys a high level
of confidence among the people.

Give one reason each to argue that Indian judiciary is independent with respect to:
Appointment of judges:
Removal of judges:
Powers of the judiciary:

92

DEMOCRATIC POLITICS

Why are people

allowed to go to
courts against the
governments
decisions?

CHECK
YOUR
PROGRESS

GLOSSARY

exercises

Coalition government: A government formed by an alliance of two or more

political parties, usually when no single party enjoys majority support of
the members in a legislature.
Executive: A body of persons having authority to initiate major policies,
make decisions and implement them on the basis of the Constitution and
laws of the country.
Government: A set of institutions that have the power to make, implement
and interpret laws so as to ensure an orderly life. In its broad sense,
government administers and supervises over citizens and resources of a
country.
Judiciary: An institution empowered to administer justice and provide a
mechanism for the resolution of legal disputes. All the courts in the country
are collectively referred to as judiciary.
Legislature: An assembly of peoples representatives with the power to
enact laws for a country. In addition to enacting laws, legislatures have
authority to raise taxes and adopt the budget and other money bills.
Office Memorandum: A communication issued by an appropriate authority
stating the policy or decision of the government.
Political Institution: A set of procedures for regulating the conduct of
government and political life in the country.
Reservations: A policy that declares some positions in government
employment and educational institutions reserved for people and
communities who have been discriminated against, are disadvantaged and
backward.
State: Political association occupying a definite territory, having an
organised government and possessing power to make domestic and foreign
policies. Governments may change, but the state continues. In common
speech, the terms country, nation and state are used as synonyms.
1

If you are elected as the President of India which of the following

decision can you take on your own?
a Select the person you like as Prime Minister.
b Dismiss a Prime Minister who has a majority in Lok Sabha.
c Ask for reconsideration of a bill passed by both the Houses.
d Nominate the leaders of your choice to the Council of Ministers.

Who among the following is a part of the political executive?

a District Collector
b Secretary of the Ministry of Home Affairs
c Home Minister
d Director General of Police

Which of the following statements about the judiciary is false?

a Every law passed by the Parliament needs approval of the Supreme
Court
b Judiciary can strike down a law if it goes against the spirit of the
Constitution
c Judiciary is independent of the Executive
d Any citizen can approach the courts if her rights are violated

WORKING

OF

INSTITUTIONS

93

exercises

Which of the following institutions can make changes to an existing

law of the country?
a The Supreme Court
b The President
c The Prime Minister
d The Parliament

Match the ministry with the news that the ministry may have released:

A new policy is being made to

increase the jute exports from
the country.
Telephone services will be made
more accessible to rural areas.
The price of rice and wheat sold
under the Public Distribution
System will go down.
A pulse polio campaign will be
launched.
The allowances of the soldiers
posted on high altitudes will be
increased.

b
c
d
e

Ministry of Defence

ii

Ministry of Agriculture, Food

and Public Distribution
Ministry of Health

iii
iv
v

Ministry of Commerce
and Industry
Ministry of Communications
and Information Technology

Of all the institutions that we have studied in this chapter, name the
one that exercises the powers on each of the following matters.
a Decision on allocation of money for developing infrastructure like
roads, irrigation etc. and different welfare activities for the citizens
b Considers the recommendation of a Committee on a law to regulate
the stock exchange
c Decides on a legal dispute between two state governments
d Implements the decision to provide relief for the victims of an
earthquake.

Why is the Prime Minister in India not directly elected by the people?
Choose the most appropriate answer and give reasons for your choice.
a In a Parliamentary democracy only the leader of the majority party
in the Lok Sabha can become the Prime Minister.
b Lok Sabha can remove the Prime Minister and the Council of Ministers
even before the expiry of their term.
c Since the Prime Minister is appointed by the President there is no
need for it.
d Direct election of the Prime Minister will involve lot of expenditure
on election.

Three friends went to watch a film that showed the hero becoming
Chief Minister for a day and making big changes in the state. Imran
said this is what the country needs. Rizwan said this kind of a personal

94

DEMOCRATIC POLITICS

exercises

rule without institutions is dangerous. Shankar said all this is a

fantasy. No minister can do anything in one day. What would be
your reaction to such a film?
9

A teacher was making preparations for a mock parliament. She called

two students to act as leaders of two political parties. She gave them
an option: Each one could choose to have a majority either in the
mock Lok Sabha or in the mock Rajya Sabha. If this choice was given
to you, which one would you choose and why?

10

After reading the example of the reservation order, three students

had different reactions about the role of the judiciary. Which view,
according to you, is a correct reading of the role of judiciary?
a Srinivas argues that since the Supreme Court agreed with the
government, it is not independent.
b Anjaiah says that judiciary is independent because it could have
given a verdict against the government order. The Supreme Court
did direct the government to modify it.
c Vijaya thinks that the judiciary is neither independent nor
conformist, but acts as a mediator between opposing parties. The
court struck a good balance between those who supported and
those who opposed the order.

Collect newspapers for the last one week and classify the news related to
the working of any of the institutions discussed in this chapter into four
groups:
Working of the legislatures
Working of the political executive
Working of the civil services
Working of the judiciary

WORKING

OF

INSTITUTIONS

95

CHAPTER 6

DEMOCRATIC
RIGHTS

OVERVIEW
In the previous two chapters we have looked at two major elements of a
democratic government. In Chapter Four we saw how a democratic
government has to be periodically elected by the people in a free and fair
manner. In Chapter Five we learnt that a democracy must be based on
institutions that follow certain rules and procedures. These elements are
necessary but not sufficient for a democracy. Elections and institutions
need to be combined with a third element enjoyment of rights to make
a government democratic. Even the most properly elected rulers working
through the established institutional process must learn not to cross some
limits. Citizens democratic rights set those limits in a democracy.
This is what we take up in this final chapter of the book. We begin by
discussing some real life cases to imagine what it means to live without
rights. This leads to a discussion on what we mean by rights and why do
we need them. As in the previous chapters, the general discussion is
followed by a focus on India. We discuss one by one the Fundamental
Rights in the Indian Constitution. Then we turn to how these rights can
be used by ordinary citizens. Who will protect and enforce them? Finally
we take a look at how the scope of rights has been expanding.
96

DEMOCRATIC POLITICS

6. 1 LIFE

WITHOUT RIGHTS

In this book we have mentioned

rights again and again. If you
remember, we have discussed rights
in each of the five preceding
chapters. Can you fill in the blanks
by recalling the rights dimension in
each chapter?
Chapter One: Chile under Pinochet
and Poland under Jaruzelsky were
not democratic because
Chapter Two: A comprehensive
definition of democracy includes

Chapter Three: Our Constitution

makers believed that fundamental
rights were quite central to the
Constitution because
Chapter Four: Every adult citizen of
India has the right to ... and to be ...
Chapter Five: If a law is against the
Constitution, every citizen has the
right to approach
Let us now begin with three
examples of what it means to live in
the absence of rights.

P r ison in GGuan
uan
tanamo BBaa y
uantanamo
Dear Mr Tony Blair,
Firstly, how are you? I sent a
letter two years ago, why didnt
you reply?!? I was waiting for a
long time but you did not reply.
Please can you give me an answer
to my question? Why is my dad in
prison? Why is he far away in
that Guantnamo Bay?! I miss my
dad so much. I have not seen my
dad for three years. I know my
dad has not done anything,
because he is a good man. I hear
everybody speak about my dad in
a nice way. Your children spend
Christmas with you, but me and
my brothers, and sisters have
spent Eid alone without our dad
for 3 years. What do you think
about that?
I hope you will answer me this
time.
Thank you,
From: Anas Jamil El-Banna,
9 years old.
7/12/2005

DEMOCRATIC RIGHTS

About 600 people were secretly

picked up by the US forces from all
over the world and put in a prison
in Guantanamo Bay, an area near
Cuba controlled by Amercian Navy.
Anass father, Jamil El-Banna, was
among them. The American
government said that they were
enemies of the US and linked to the
attack on New York on 11
September 2001. In most cases the
governments of their countries were
not asked or even informed about
their imprisonment. Like other
prisoners, El-Bannas family got to
know that he was in that prison only
through the media. Families of
prisoners, media or even UN
representatives were not allowed to
meet them. The US army arrested
them, interrogated them and
decided whether to keep them there
or not. There was no trial before any
magistrate in the US. Nor could
these prisoners approach courts in
their own country.
Amnesty International, an
international human rights
organisation, collected information
on the condition of the prisoners in
Guantanamo Bay and reported that
the prisoners were being tortured in
ways that violated the US laws. They
97

were being denied the treatment that

even prisoners of war must get as per
international treaties. Many prisoners
had tried protesting against these
conditions by going on a hunger
strike. Prisoners were not released
even after they were officially declared
not guilty. An independent inquiry
by the UN supported these findings.
The UN Secretary General said the
prison in Guantanamo Bay should be
closed down. The US government
refused to accept these pleas.

C itiz
ens
igh
ts in
itizens
ens RRigh
ights
S audi AArr abia

The case of Guantanamo Bay looks

like an exception, for it involves the
government of one country denying
rights to citizens of another country.
Let us therefore look at the case of
Saudi Arabia and the position of the
citizens with regard to their
government. Consider these facts:
The country is ruled by a
hereditary king and the people
have no role in electing or
changing their rulers.
The king selects the legislature as
well as the executive. He appoints
the judges and can change any of
their decisions.
Citizens cannot form political parties or any political organisations.
Media cannot report anything that
the monarch does not like.
There is no freedom of religion.
Every citizen is required to be
Muslim. Non-Muslim residents
can follow their religion in private,
but not in public.
Women are subjected to many
public restrictions. The testimony
of one man is considered equal to
that of two women.
This is true not just of Saudi
Arabia. There are many countries in
the world where several of these
conditions exist.
98

E thnic massacr
oso
massacree in KKoso
osovv o

You might think that this is possible

in an absolute monarchy but not
in countries which choose their
rulers. Just consider this story from
Kosovo. This was a province of
Yugoslavia before its split. In this
province the population was
overwhelmingly ethnic Albanian.
But in the entire country, Serbs
were in majority. A narrow minded
Serb
nationalist
Milosevic
(pronounced Miloshevich) had won
the election. His government was
very hostile to the Kosovo
Albanians. He wanted the Serbs to
dominate the country. Many Serb
leaders thought that Ethnic
minorities like Albanians should
either leave the country or accept
the dominance of the Serbs.
This is what happened to an
Albanian family in a town in Kosovo
in April 1999:
74-year-old Batisha Hoxha was
sitting in her kitchen with her 77yearold husband Izet, staying warm
by the stove. They had heard
explosions but did not realise that
Serbian troops had already entered
the town. The next thing she knew,
five or six soldiers had burst through
the front door and were demanding
Where are your children?
they shot Izet three times in the chest
recalls Batisha. With her husband
dying before her, the soldiers pulled
the wedding ring off her finger and
told her to get out. I was not even

outside the gate when they burnt the

house She was standing on the

street in the rain with no house, no

husband, no possessions but the
clothes she was wearing.
This news report was typical of
what happened to thousands of
Albanians in that period. Do
DEMOCRATIC POLITICS

If you were a Serb,

would you support
what Milosevic did
in Kosovo? Do you
think his project of
establishing Serb
dominance was
good for the
Serbs?

remember that this massacre was

being carried out by the army of
their own country, working under
the direction of a leader who came
to power through democratic
elections. This was one of the worst
instances of killings based on ethnic
prejudices in recent times. Finally
several other countries intervened
to stop this massacre. Milosevic lost
power and was tried by the
International Court of Justice for
crimes against humanity.

CHECK
YOUR
PROGRESS

A C T I V I T Y
Write

a letter to Anas Jamil in UK, describing

your reactions after reading his letter to Tony
Blair.
Write a letter from Batisha in Kosovo to a
woman who faced a similar situation in
India.
Write a memorandum on behalf of women in
Saudi Arabia to the Secretary General of the
United Nations.

For each of the three cases of life without rights, mention an example from India. These could include the
following:
Newspaper reports on custodial violence.
Newspaper reports on force-feeding of prisoners who go on hunger strike.
Ethnic massacre in any part of our country.
Reports regarding unequal treatment of women.
List the similarities and differences between the earlier case and the Indian example. It is not necessary
that for each of these cases you must find an exact Indian parallel.

6.2 RIGHTS

IN A DEMOCRACY

Think of all the examples that we

have discussed so far. Think of the
victims in each example: the
prisoners in Guantanamo Bay,
women in Saudi Arabia, Albanians
in Kosovo. If you were in their
position, what would you have
wished? If you could, what would
you do to ensure that such things
do not happen to anyone?
You would perhaps desire a
system where security, dignity and
fair play are assured to everyone.
You might want, for example, that
no one should be arrested without
proper reason and information. And
if someone is arrested, he or she
should have a fair chance to defend
themselves. You might agree that
such assurance cannot apply to
DEMOCRATIC RIGHTS

everything. One has to be reasonable

in what one expects and demands of
everyone else, for one has to grant
the same to everyone. But you might
insist that the assurance does not
remain on paper, that there is
someone
to
enforce
these
assurances, that those who violate
these are punished. In other words,
you might want a system where at
least a minimum is guaranteed to
everyone powerful or weak, rich
or poor, majority or minority. This
is the spirit behind thinking about
rights.

What are rights?

Rights are claims of a person over

other fellow beings, over the society
and over the government. All of us
99

want to live happily, without fear

and without being subjected to
degraded treatment. For this we
expect others to behave in such a
way that does not harm us or hurt
us. Equally, our actions should not
also harm or hurt others. So a right
is possible when you make a claim
that is equally possible for others.
You cannot have a right that harms
or hurts others. You cannot have a
right to play a game in such a way
that it breaks the neighbours
window. The Serbs in Yugoslavia
could not have claimed the whole
country for themselves. The claims
we make should be reasonable.
They should be such that can be
made available to others in an equal
measure. Thus, a right comes with
an obligation to respect other rights.
Just because we claim some thing
it does not become our right. It has
to be recognised by the society we
live in. Rights acquire meaning only
in society. Every society makes
certain rules to regulate our
conduct. They tell us what is right
and what is wrong. What is
recognised by the society as rightful
becomes the basis of rights. That is
why the notion of rights changes
from time to time and society to
society. Two hundred years ago
anyone who said that women should
have right to vote would have
sounded strange. Today not granting
them vote in Saudi Arabia appears
strange.
When the socially recognised
claims are written into law they
acquire real force. Otherwise they
remain merely as natural or moral
rights.
The
prisoners
in
Guantanamo Bay had a moral claim
not to be tortured or humiliated. But
they could not go to anyone to
enforce this claim. When law
recognises some claims they become
100

enforceable. We can then demand

their application. When fellow
citizens or the government do not
respect these rights we call it
violation or infringement of our
rights. In such circumstances
citizens can approach courts to
protect their rights. So, if we want
to call any claim a right, it has to
have these three qualities. Rights
are reasonable claims of persons
recognised by society and
sanctioned by law.

W h y do w
igh
ts in a
wee nee
needd rrigh
ights
democr
democraa ccyy ?

Rights are necessary for the very

sustenance of a democracy. In a
democracy every citizen has to have
the right to vote and the right to
be elected to government. For
democratic elections to take place, it
is necessary that citizens should
have the right to express their
opinion, form political parties and
take part in political activities.
Rights also perform a very special
role in a democracy. Rights protect
minorities from the oppression of
majority. They ensure that the
majority cannot do whatever it likes.
Rights are guarantees which can be
used when things go wrong. Things
may go wrong when some citizens
may wish to take away the rights of
others. This usually happens when
those in majority want to dominate
those in minority. The government
should protect the citizens rights in
such a situation. But sometimes
elected governments may not
protect or may even attack the rights
of their own citizens. That is why
some rights need to be placed higher
than the government, so that the
government cannot violate them. In
most democracies the basic rights
of the citizen are written down in the
constitution.
DEMOCRATIC POLITICS

What are the

examples of
elected
governments not
protecting or even
attacking the rights
of their own
citizens? Why do
they do that?

6.3 RIGHTS

Everyone knows
that the rich can
have better lawyers
in the courts. What
is the point in
talking about
equality before
law?

IN THE

INDIAN CONSTITUTION

In India, like most other

democracies in the world, these
rights are mentioned in the
Constitution. Some rights which are
fundamental to our life are given a
special status. They are called
Fundamental Rights. We have
already read in Chapter Three the
preamble to our Constitution. It
talks about securing for all its
citizens equality, liberty and justice.
Fundamental Rights put this
promise into effect. They are an
important basic feature of Indias
Constitution.
You already know our Constitution
provides for six Fundamental Rights.
Can you recall these? What exactly
do these rights mean for an ordinary
citizen? Let us look at these one by
one.

R igh
qualit
ightt ttoo EEqualit
qualityy

The Constitution says that the

government shall not deny to any
person in India equality before the law
or the equal protection of the laws. It
means that the laws apply in the same
manner to all, regardless of a persons
status. This is called the rule of law.
Rule of law is the foundation of any
democracy. It means that no person
is above the law. There cannot be any
distinction between a political leader,
government official and an ordinary
citizen.
Every citizen, from the Prime
Minister to a small farmer in a remote
village, is subjected to the same laws.
No person can legally claim any
special treatment or privilege just
because he or she happens to be an
important person. For example, a few
years ago a former Prime Minister of
the country faced a court case on
charges of cheating. The court finally
declared that he was not guilty. But
as long as the case continued, he had
to go to the court, give evidence and
file papers, just like any other citizen.
This basic position is further
clarified in the Constitution by
spelling out some implications of the
Right to Equality. The government
shall not discriminate against any
citizen on grounds only of religion,
race, caste, sex or place of birth. Every
citizen shall have access to public
places like shops, restaurants, hotels,
and cinema halls. Similarly, there
shall be no restriction with regard to
the use of wells, tanks, bathing ghats,
roads, playgrounds and places of
public resorts maintained by
government or dedicated to the use
of general public. This might appear
very obvious, but it was necessary to

Right
against
Exploitation

Cultural
and
Educational
Rights

F U N D A M E N T A L

Right to
Equality

Right to
Freedom
of Religion

R I G H T S

Right to
Constitutional
Remedies

DEMOCRATIC RIGHTS

Right to
Freedom

101

incorporate these rights in the

Constitution of our country where the
traditional caste system did not allow
people from some communities to
access all public places.
The same principle applies to
public jobs. All citizens have equality
of opportunity in matters relating to
employment or appointment to any
position in the government. No
citizen shall be discriminated
against or made ineligible for
employment on the grounds
mentioned above. You have read in
Chapter Five that the Government
of India has provided reservations
for Scheduled Castes, Scheduled
Tribes and Other Backward Classes.
Various governments have different
schemes for giving preference to
women, poor or physically
handicapped in some kinds of jobs.
Are these reservations against the
right to equality? They are not. For
equality does not mean giving
everyone the same treatment, no
matter what they need. Equality
means giving everyone an equal
opportunity to achieve whatever one
is capable of. Sometimes it is
necessary to give special treatment
to someone in order to ensure equal
opportunity. This is what job
reservations do. Just to clarify this,
the Constitution says that
reservations of this kind are not a
violation of the Right to Equality.
The principle of non-discrimination
extends to social life as well. The
Constitution mentions one extreme
form of social discrimination, the
practice of untouchability, and
clearly directs the government to put
an end to it. The practice of
untouchability has been forbidden
in any form. Untouchability here
does not only mean refusal to touch
people belonging to certain castes.
It refers to any belief or social
102

A C T I V I T Y
Go to the playground of the school or any stadium and watch a 400 metre race on any track.
Why are the competitors in the outer lane placed
ahead of those in the inner lane at the starting
point of the race? What would happen if all the
competitors start the race from the same line?
Which of these two would be an equal and fair
race? Apply this example to a competition for
jobs.
Observe any big public building. Is there a ramp
for physically handicapped? Are there any other
facilities that make it possible for physically
handicapped to use the building in the same
way as any one else? Should these special facilities be provided, if it leads to extra expenditure on the building? Do these special provisions go against the principle of equality?

practice which looks down upon

people on account of their birth with
certain caste labels. Such practice
denies them interaction with others
or access to public places as equal
citizens. So the Constitution made
untouchability a punishable offence.
DEMOCRATIC POLITICS

In 1999, P. Sainath wrote a series of newsreports

in The Hindu describing untouchability and caste
discrimination that was still being practiced
against Dalits or persons belonging to Scheduled
Castes. He travelled to various parts of the country and found that in many places:
Tea stalls kept two kinds of cups, one for Dalits
one for others;
Barbers refused to serve dalit clients;
Dalit students were made to sit separately in the
classroom or drink water from separate picher;
Dalit grooms were not allowed to ride a horse
in the wedding procession; and
Dalits were not allowed to use common
handpump or if they did, the handpump was
washed to purify it.
All these fall under the definition of untouchability.
Can you think of some examples from your own
area?

R igh
ightt ttoo FFrr e eedd o m

Should the
freedom of
expression be
extended to those
who are spreading
wrong and narrowminded ideas?
Should they be
allowed to confuse
the public?

Freedom means absence of

constraints. In practical life it means
absence of interference in our affairs
by others be it other individuals
or the government. We want to live
in society, but we want to be free.
We want to do things in the way we
want to do them. Others should not
dictate us what we should do. So,
under the Indian Constitution all
citizens have the right to
Freedom of speech and expression
Assembly in a peaceful manner
Form associations and unions
Move freely throughout the
country
Reside in any part of the country,
and
Practice any profession, or to carry
on any occupation, trade or
business.
You should remember that every
citizen has the right to all these
freedoms. That means you cannot
exercise your freedom in such a
DEMOCRATIC RIGHTS

manner that violates others right to

freedom. Your freedoms should not
cause public nuisance or disorder.
You are free to do everything which
injures no one else. Freedom is not
unlimited licence to do what one
wants. Accordingly, the government
can impose certain reasonable
restrictions on our freedoms in the
larger interests of the society
Freedom of speech and
expression is one of the essential
features of any democracy. Our ideas
and personality develop only when we
are able to freely communicate with
others. You may think differently
from others. Even if a hundred
people think in one way, you should
have the freedom to think differently
and express your views accordingly.
You may disagree with a policy of
government or activities of an
association. You are free to criticise
the government or the activities of
the
association
in
your
conversations with parents, friends
and relatives. You may publicise
your views through a pamphlet,
magazine or newspaper. You can do
it through paintings, poetry or
songs. However, you cannot use this
freedom to instigate violence against
others. You cannot use it to incite
people to rebel against government.
Irfan Khan

Many Forms of Untouchability

103

104

Irfan Khan

procedure established by law. It

means that no person can be killed
unless the court has ordered a death
sentence. It also means that a
government or police officer cannot
arrest or detain any citizen unless
he has proper legal justification.
Even when they do, they have to
follow some procedures:
A person who is arrested and
detained in custody will have to be
informed of the reasons for such
arrest and detention.
A person who is arrested and
detained shall be produced before
the nearest magistrate within a
period of 24 hours of arrest.
Such a person has the right to
consult a lawyer or engage a
lawyer for his defence.

Irfan Khan

Neither can you use it to defame

others by saying false and mean
things that cause damage to a
persons reputation.
Citizens have the freedom to
hold meetings, processions, rallies
and demonstrations on any issue.
They may want to discuss a
problem, exchange ideas, mobilise
public support to a cause, or seek
votes for a candidate or party in an
election. But such meetings have to
be peaceful. They should not lead
to public disorder or breach of peace
in society. Those who participate in
these activities and meetings should
not carry weapons with them.
Citizens also can form associations.
For example workers in a factory can
form a workers union to promote
their interests. Some people in a
town may come together to form an
association to campaign against
corruption or pollution.
As citizens we have the freedom to
travel to any part of the country.
We are free to reside and settle in any
party of the territory of India. Let us
say a person who belongs to the state
of Assam wants to start a business
in Hyderabad. He may not have any
connection with that city, he may not
have even seen it ever. Yet as a citizen
of India he has the right to set up base
there. This right allows lakhs of
people to migrate from villages to
towns and from poorer regions of the
countries to prosperous regions and
big cities. The same freedom extends
to choice of occupations. No one can
force you to do or not to do a certain
job. Women cannot be told that some
kinds of occupations are not for them.
People from deprived castes cannot
be kept to their traditional
occupations.
The Constitution says that no
person can be deprived of his life or
personal liberty except according to

DEMOCRATIC POLITICS

Let us recall the cases of

Guantanamo Bay and Kosovo. The
victims in both these cases faced a

CHECK
YOUR
PROGRESS

Are these cases instances of violation of right to freedom? If yes, which constitutional provision does
each of these violate?
The government of India banned Salman Rushdies book Satanic Verses on the ground that it was
disrespectful to Prophet Mohammed and was likely to hurt the feelings of Muslim community.
Every film has to be approved by the Censor Board of the government before it can be shown to
the public. But there is no such restriction if the same story is published in a book or a magazine.
The government is considering a proposal that there will be industrial zones or sectors of economy
where workers will not be allowed to form unions or go on strike.
City administration has imposed a ban on use of public microphones after 10 p.m. in view of the
approaching secondary school examinations.

R igh
xploita
tion
ightt against EExploita
xploitation

CHECK
YOUR
PROGRESS

threat to the most basic of all

liberties, the protection of
individual life and personal liberty.

Once the right to liberty and equality

is granted, it follows that every
citizen has a right not to be
exploited. Yet the Constitution
makers thought is was necessary to
write down certain clear provisions
to prevent exploitation of the weaker
sections of the society.
The Constitution mentions three
specific evils and declares these
illegal. First, the Constitution
prohibits traffic in human beings.
Traffic here means selling and
buying of human beings, usually
women, for immoral purposes.
Second, our Constitution also
prohibits forced labour or begar in

any form. Begar is a practice where

the worker is forced to render service
to the master free of charge or at a
nominal remuneration. When this
practice takes place on a life-long
basis, it is called the practice of
bonded labour.
Finally, the Constitution also
prohibits child labour. No one can
employ a child below the age of
fourteen to work in any factory or
mine or in any other hazardous
work, such as railways and ports.
Using this as a basis many laws have
been made to prohibit children from
working in industries such as beedi
making, firecrackers and matches,
printing and dyeing.

On the basis of these news reports write a letter to the editor or a petition to a court highlighting the
violation of right against exploitation:

A petition was filed in the

Madras High Court. The
petitioner said a large number
of children aged between
seven and 12 were taken from
villages in Salem district and
sold at auctions at Olur Nagar
in Keralas Thrissur district.
The petitioner requested the
courts to order the government
to check these facts.
(March 2005)

Children, from the age of five,

were employed in the iron ore
mines in the Hospet, Sandur and
the Ikal areas in Karnataka.
Children were forced to carry out
digging, breaking stones, loading,
dumping, transporting and
processing of iron ore with no
safety equipment, fixed wages and
working hours. They handled a
high-level of toxic wastes and
were exposed to mine dust, which
was above the permissible level.
The school dropout rate in the
region was very high. (May 2005)

DEMOCRATIC RIGHTS

The latest annual survey

conducted by the National
Sample Survey Organisation
found that the number of female
child labourers was growing both
in rural and urban areas. The
survey revealed there were 41
female child labourers per
thousand worker population in
rural areas as against the
previous figure of 34 per
thousand. The figure for male
child had remained at 31. (April
2005)

105

A C T I V I T Y
Do you know what the minimum wages in your
state are? If not, can you find out? Speak to five
people doing different types of work in your
neighbourhood and find out if they are earning
the minimum wages or not. Ask them if they know
what the minimum wages are. Ask them if men
and women are getting the same wages.

R igh
dom of RReligion
eligion
ightt ttoo FFrr e eedom
Right to freedom includes right to
freedom of religion as well. In this case
too, the Constitution makers were
very particular to state it clearly. You
have already read in Chapter Three
that India is a secular state. Most
people in India, like anywhere else in
the world, follow different religions.
Some may not believe in any religion.
Secularism is based on the idea that
the state is concerned only with
relations among human beings, and
not with the relation between human
beings and God. A secular state is one
that does not establish any one
religion as official religion. Indian
secularism practices an attitude of a
principled and equal distance from
all religions. The state has to be
neutral and impartial in dealing with
all religions.
Every person has a right to
profess, practice and propagate
the religion he or she believes in.
Every religious group or sect is free
to manage its religious affairs. A
right to propagate ones religion,
however, does not mean that a
person has right to compel another
person to convert into his religion by
means of force, fraud, inducement or
allurement. Of course, a person is free
to change religion on his or her own
will. Freedom to practice religion
does not mean that a person can do
whatever he wants in the name of
106

religion. For example, one cannot

sacrifice animals or human beings
as offerings to supernatural forces
or gods. Religious practices which
treat women as inferior or those that
infringe womens freedom are not
allowed. For example, one cannot
force a widowed woman to shave
head or wear white clothes.
A secular state is one that does not
confer any privilege or favour on any
particular religion. Nor does it punish or discriminate against people
on the basis of religion they follow.
Thus the government cannot compel any person to pay any taxes for
the promotion or maintenance of
any particular religion or religious
institution. There shall be no
religious instruction in the government educational institutions. In
educational institutions managed by
private bodies no person shall be
compelled to take part in any
religious instruction or to attend any
religious worship.

C ultur
al and EEduca
duca
tional
ultural
ducational
R igh
ightt s

You might wonder why were the

Constitution makers were so
particular in providing written
guarantees of the rights of the
minorities. Why are there no special
guarantees for the majority? Well, for
the simple reason that the working
of democracy gives power to the
majority. It is the language, culture
and religion of minorities that needs
special protection. Otherwise, they
may get neglected or undermined
under the impact of the language,
religion and culture of the majority.
That is why the Constitution specifies the cultural and educational
rights of the minorities:
Any section of citizens with a
distinct language or culture have
a right to conserve it.
DEMOCRATIC POLITICS

The Constitution
does not give
people their
religion. Then how
can it give people
the right to practise
their religion?

 Admission

to any educational
institution
maintained
by
government
or
receiving
government aid cannot be denied
to any citizen on the ground of
religion or language.
All minorities have the right to establish and administer educational institutions of their choice.
Here minority does not mean only
religious minority at the national

level. In some places people

speaking a particular language are
in majority; people speaking a
different language are in a
minority. For example, Telugu
speaking people form a majority in
Andhra Pradesh. But they are a
minority in the neighbouring State
of Karnataka. Sikhs constitute a
majority in Punjab. But they are a
minority in Rajasthan, Haryana and
Delhi.

Read these news reports and identify the right that is being debated in each of these cases:

CHECK
YOUR
PROGRESS

An

emergency session of the Shiromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee (SGPC) rejected the
proposal to form a separate body to manage the affairs of Sikh shrines in Haryana. It warned the
government that the Sikh community would not tolerate any interference in their religious affairs.
(June 2005)

The Allahabad High Court quashed the Central law, which gave Aligarh Muslim University its minority

status, and held illegal the reservation of seats for Muslims in its postgraduate medical courses.
(January 2006)
The

Rajasthan Government has decided to enact an anti-conversion law. Christian leaders have said
that the Bill would aggravate the sense of insecurity and fear in the minds of minorities. (March 2005)

How can we secure these

rights?

Can the President

of India stop you
from approaching
the Supreme Court
to secure your
fundamental
rights?

If rights are like guarantees, they are

of no use if there is no one to honour
them. The fundamental rights in the
Constitution are important because
they are enforceable. We have a right
to seek the enforcement of the above
mentioned rights. This is called the
Right to Constitutional Remedies.
This itself is a Fundamental Right.
This right makes other rights
effective. It is possible that
sometimes our rights may be
violated by fellow citizens, private
bodies or by the government. When
any of our rights are violated we can
seek remedy through courts. If it is a
Fundamental Right we can directly
approach the Supreme Court or the
High Court of a state. That is why Dr.
Ambedkar called the Right to
Constitutional Remedies, the heart
DEMOCRATIC RIGHTS

and soul of our Constitution.

Fundamental
Rights
are
guaranteed against the actions of
the Legislatures, the Executive, and
any other authorities instituted by
the government. There can be no law
or action that violates the
Fundamental Rights. If any act of the
Legislature or the Executive takes
away or limits any of the
Fundamental Rights it will be
invalid. We can challenge such laws
of
the
central
and
state
governments, the policies and
actions of the government or the
governmental organisations like the
nationalised banks or electricity
boards. Courts also enforce the
Fundamental Rights against private
individuals and bodies. The
Supreme Court and High Courts
have the power to issue directions,
orders or writs for the enforcement
of the Fundamental Rights. They can
107

National Human Rights Commission

Do you notice references to the National Human
Rights Commission (NHRC) in the news collage
on this page? These references reflect the growing
awareness of human rights and struggles for human
dignity. Many cases of human rights violations in
diverse fields, for instance, Gujarat riots, are being
brought to the public notice from across India.
Human rights organisations and the media often
criticise government agencies for not seriously
pursuing these cases or catching the culprits.
Someone had to intervene on behalf of the
victims. This is where the National Human Rights
Commission stepped in. This is an independent
commission set up by law in 1993. Like
judiciary, the Commission is independent of the
government. The Commission is appointed by the
President and includes retired judges, officers and
eminent citizens. Yet it does not have the burden of
deciding court cases. So it can focus on helping
the victims secure their human rights. These
include all the rights granted to the citizens by the
Constitution. For NHRC human rights also include
the rights mentioned in the UN sponsored
international treaties that India has signed.

108

The NHRC cannot by itself punish the guilty.

That is the responsibility of courts. The NHRC is
there to make independent and credible inquiry
into any case of violation of human rights. It also
inquires into any case of abetment of such
violation or negligence in controlling it by any
government officer and takes other general steps
to promote human rights in the country. The
Commission presents its findings and
recommendations to the government or intervene
in the court on behalf of the victims. It has wide
ranging powers to carry out its inquiry. Like any
court it can summon witnesses, question any
government official, demand any official paper,
visit any prison for inspection or send its own
team for on-the-spot inquiry.
Any citizen of India can write a letter to this
address to complain against the violation of
human rights: National Human Rights
Commission, Faridkot House, Copernicus Marg,
New Delhi 110001. There is no fee or any
formal procedure to approach the NHRC.
Like NHRC, there are State Human Rights
Commissions in 23 states of the country (as on
1 September 2013).

DEMOCRATIC POLITICS

also award compensation to the

victims and punishment to the
violators. We have already seen in
Chapter Five that the judiciary in
our country is independent of the
government and the parliament. We
also noted that our judiciary is very
powerful and can do whatever is
needed to protect the rights of the
citizens.
In case of any violation of a
Fundamental Right the aggrieved
person can go to a court for remedy.
But now, any person can go to court
against the violation of the
Fundamental Right, if it is of social
or public interest. It is called Public

6.4 EXPANDING

Are these rights

only for adults?
Which of these
rights are available
to children?

A C T I V I T Y
Is there a State Human Rights Commission in
your state? Find out about its activities.
Write a petition to the NHRC if you know any
instances of human rights violation in your area.

SCOPE OF RIGHTS

We began this chapter by discussing

the significance of rights. In much
of the chapter we have focussed only
on Fundamental Rights in the
Constitution. You might think that
Fundamental Rights granted by the
Constitution are the only rights
citizen have. This is not true. While
Fundamental Rights are the source
of all rights, our Constitution and
law offers a wider range of rights.
Over the years the scope of rights
has expanded.
Sometimes it leads to expansion
in the legal rights that the citizen can
enjoy. From time to time, the courts
gave judgments to expand the scope
of rights. Certain rights like right to
freedom of press, right to
information, and right to education
are derived from the Fundamental
Rights. Now school education has
become a right for Indian citizens.
The governments are responsible for
providing free and compulsory
education to all children up to the
age of 14 years. Parliament has
DEMOCRATIC RIGHTS

Interest Litigation (PIL). Under the

PIL any citizen or group of citizens
can approach the Supreme Court or
a High Court for the protection of
public interest against a particular
law or action of the government. One
can write to the judges even on a
postcard. The court will take up the
matter if the judges find it in public
interest.

enacted a law giving the right to

information to the citizens. This Act
was made under the Fundamental
Right to freedom of thought and
expression. We have a right to seek
information from government
offices. Recently the Supreme Court
has expanded the meaning of the
right to life to include the right to
food. Also, rights are not limited only
to Fundamental Rights as
enumerated in the Constitution.
Constitution provides many more
rights, which may not be Fundamental
Rights. For example the right to
property is not a Fundamental Right
but it is a constitutional right. Right to
vote in elections is an important
constitutional right.
Sometimes the expansion takes
place in what is called human rights.
These are universal moral claims that
may or may not have been recognised
by law. In that sense these claims are
not rights going by the definition that
we presented earlier. With the
expansion of democracy all over the
world, there is greater pressure on
109

governments to accept these claims.

Some international covenants have
also contributed to the expansion of

International Covenant on
Economic, Social and Cultural
Rights
This international covenant recognises many
rights that are not directly a par t of the
Fundamental Rights in the Indian Constitution.
This has not yet become an international treaty.
But human right activists all over the world see
this as a standard of human rights. These include:
right to work: opportunity to everyone to earn
livelihood by working
right to safe and healthy working conditions,
fair wages that can provide decent standard of
living for the workers and their families
right to adequate standard of living including
adequate food, clothing and housing
right to social security and insurance
right to health: medical care during illness,
special care for women during childbirth and
prevention of epidemics
right to education: free and compulsory primary
education, equal access to higher education.

rights.
Thus the scope of rights has been
expanding and new rights are
evolving over time. They are result
of struggle of the people. New rights
emerge as societies develop or as
new constitutions are made. The
Constitution of South Africa guarantees
its citizens several kinds of new rights:
Right to privacy, so that citizens
or their home cannot be searched,
their phones cannot be tapped,
their communication cannot be
opened.
Right to an environment that is not
harmful to their health or wellbeing;
Right to have access to adequate
housing.
Right to have access to health care
services, sufficient food and water;
no one may be refused emergency
medical treatment.
Many people think that the right to
work, right to health, right to minimum
livelihood and right to privacy should
be made fundamental rights in India
as well. What do you think?

Amnesty International: An international organisation of volunteers

who campaign for human rights. This organisation brings out
independent reports on the violation of human rights all over the world.
Claim: Demand for legal or moral entitlements a person makes on fellow
citizens, society or the government.
Covenant: Promise made by individuals, groups or countries to uphold a
rule or principle. It is legally binding on the signatories to the agreement
or statement.
Dalit: A person who belongs to the castes which were considered low and
not touchable by others. Dalits are also known by other names such as
the Scheduled Castes, Depressed Classes etc.
Ethnic group: An ethnic group is a human population whose members
usually identify with each other on the basis of a common ancestry. People
of an ethnic group are united by cultural practices, religious beliefs and
historical memories.
Traffic: Selling and buying of men, women or children for immoral
purposes.
Summon: An order issued by a court asking a person to appear before it.
Writ: A formal document containing an order of the court to the government
issued only by High Court or the Supreme Court.
110

DEMOCRATIC POLITICS

GLOSSARY

exercises
1

Which of the following is not an instance of an exercise of a

fundamental right?
a Workers from Bihar go to the Punjab to work on the farms
b Christian missions set up a chain of missionary schools
c Men and women government employees get the same salary
d Parents property is inherited by their children

Which of the following freedoms is not available to an Indian citizen?

a Freedom to criticise the government
b Freedom to participate in armed revolution
c Freedom to start a movement to change the government
d Freedom to oppose the central values of the Constitution

Which of the following rights is available under the Indian

Constitution?
a Right to work
b Right to adequate livelihood
c Right to protect ones culture
d Right to privacy

Name the Fundamental Right under which each of the following rights
falls:
a Freedom to propagate ones religion
b Right to life
c Abolition of untouchability
d Ban on bonded labour

Which of these statements about the relationship between democracy

and rights is more valid? Give reasons for your preference.
a Every country that is a democracy gives rights to its citizens.
b Every country that gives rights to its citizens is a democracy.
c Giving rights is good, but it is not necessary for a democracy.

Are these restrictions on the right to freedom justified? Give reasons

for your answer.
a Indian citizens need permission to visit some border areas of the
country for reasons of security.
b Outsiders are not allowed to buy property in some areas to protect
the interest of the local population.
c The government bans the publication of a book that can go against
the ruling party in the next elections.

Manoj went to a college to apply for admission into an MBA course.

The clerk refused to take his application and said You, the son of a
sweeper, wish to be a manager! Has anyone done this job in your
community? Go to the municipality office and apply for a sweepers
position. Which of Manojs fundamental rights are being violated in
this instance? Spell these out in a letter from Manoj to the district
collector.

DEMOCRATIC RIGHTS

111

When Madhurima went to the property registration office, the

Registrar told her, You cant write your name as Madhurima Banerjee
d/o A. K. Banerjee. You are married, so you must give your husbands
name. Your husbands surname is Rao. So your name should be
changed to Madhurima Rao. She did not agree. She said If my
husbands name has not changed after marriage, why should mine?
In your opinion who is right in this dispute? And why?

Thousands of tribals and other forest dwellers gathered at Piparia in

Hoshangabad district in Madhya Pradesh to protest against their
proposed displacement from the Satpura National Park, Bori Wildlife
Sanctuary and Panchmarhi Wildlife Sanctuary. They argue that such
a displacement is an attack on their livelihood and beliefs. Government
claims that their displacement is essential for the development of
the area and for protection of wildlife. Write a petition on behalf of
the forest dwellers to the NHRC, a response from the government
and a report of the NHRC on this matter.

10

Draw a web interconnecting different rights discussed in this chapter.

For example right to freedom of movement is connected to the freedom
of occupation. One reason for this is that freedom of movement enables
a person to go to place of work within ones village or city or to another
village, city or state. Similarly this right can be used for pilgrimage,
connected with freedom to follow ones religion. Draw a circle for
each right and mark arrows that show connection between or among
different rights. For each arrow, give an example that shows the
linkage.

In every chapter we have done an exercise on reading the newspaper. Let

us now try to write for the newspaper. Take any example from the reports
discussed in this chapter or any other local example that you are familiar
with and write the following:
Letter to the editor highlighting a case of human rights violation.
Press release by a human rights organisation.
A headline and a news item concerning a Supreme Court order
related to Fundamental Rights.
Editorial on growing incidents of custodial violence.
Put these together and make a newspaper for your school notice board.

112

DEMOCRATIC POLITICS

exercises