Team Anna gets a lesson in democracy

Mumbai, Dec. 23: The judiciary today spoke up for the legislature and the democratic process in a far more full-throated and cogent manner than what the executive and Parliament have managed in recent months.

“How is the country’s interest involved? We are a democratic set-up. We have elected a government. Wouldn’t our intervention interfere in the functioning of Parliament?” a two-judge bench of Bombay High Court asked a petitioner who wanted rent on a ground waived so that Anna Hazare can sit on a three-day fast against the Lokpal bill tabled in the House yesterday.

The bench of Justices P.B. Majmudar and Mridula Bhatkar shot off question after question touching upon the fundamental principles of lawmaking, democratic responsibilities and corrective avenues, the supremacy of Parliament, the use of sweeping phrases like public interest and the rights of citizens who do not want to take part in protest programmes. (See chart above)

Displaying striking clarity and logic that seem to often desert the government, the court said: “We can’t allow parallel canvassing when Parliament is seized with debate on the bill. You can propagate the bill sitting at home. Till now, the bill has not been passed. No one knows what form and what features it will have. Is public debate permissible at this stage?”

The questions were all the more striking as they came from the judiciary, which has been giving several anxious moments to the executive over the past few months.

At the root of the dispute was an issue far less profound than constitutional propriety but a habit as rampant as corruption: seeking discounts on assets owned by the public.

Supporters of Hazare had approached the court to get the rent waived for the ground owned by the state-run Mumbai Metropolitan Region Development Authority (MMRDA).

The court not only disallowed the freebie but also raised the larger questions that — had they come from any other platform — would be termed “heresy” in the current atmosphere of drowning out dissent in disdain.

Not that some muted potshots were not taken. Without explicitly mentioning the high court order, film-maker Shekar Kapur tweeted: “Legal tech objections to Anna movement remind me of how British responded to Gandhian movements.”

“If Anna took d streets like Gandhi did in Dandi March, India would come 2 a stop as millions will march w/him,” another tweet from the same handle said.

That forecast — or implied threat — is unlikely to go wrong. Already, more than 33,000 people, including 378 from Calcutta till 9.30pm, have registered themselves to take part in a jail bharo movement that will start a day after Hazare’s three-day fast ends on December 29. It will be a cakewalk for Team Anna to fill the 50,000-capacity MMRDA ground for which it has agreed to pay now.

For seeking the waiver, Team Anna had cited another excuse often misused by many: “national interest”. To which the court asked: “How is the country’s interest involved?”

Team Anna said the money (over Rs 13 lakh), which was deposited with the officials in the evening, would be raised through donations payable by cheques and demand drafts.

Team Anna later conceded that it was a mistake for the group to have approached the court for a waiver or a discount but did not comment on the larger observations. Hazare said he would have dissuaded his supporters if they had sought his advice.

The above is from the Telegraph.

Since the paper is always pro-Congress, it has jumped on this opportunity to shore up the Congress and discredit Anna's agitation which it has been doing with unfailing regularity ever sice Anna started agitating.

I beg to differ from the views expressed by the honourable judges Justices P.B. Majmudar and Mridula Bhatkar.

What the honourable judges fail to grasp is that the crooks are being made to sit in judgement as to whether they should be allow to continue all the crimes they are committing.
If dawn shows the day, then the way the debate is taking place in Parliament with Lalu Yadav and Mulayam Singh Yadav leading the way, the Bill is going to be watered down to nothing.
Hence, this agitation is necessary to keep the pressures on the MPs that if they do not pass what the general mass of the population wants then they better watch out.
The present lot of MPs who represent us do not represent the voice of the people.
As far as being elected by the people is concerned, our MPs get elected with hardly 10% of the votes of the electorate in any constituency. 50% of the people do not vote as they know that all the candidates are crooks. The balance 50% is divided between the different candidates.
So how can MPs be considered to represent the people.
Anna and his group, although not elected, are actually representing the voice of the people.
People are voluntarily going to their rally, spending money from their own pockets and even giving donations at site.
In any political rally, people are paid money and other incentives or threatened to attend the rally.