Umesh Baurai and Dr. Avnish Jolly, Chandigarh 19 June:Voluntary Heath Association of Punjab (VHAP) in collaboration with Department of Anthropology, Panjab University (PU), Chandigarh held a panel discussion on ‘Recent Panchayat Elections in Punjab: Context & Trends’ on May 29, 2008. Conceptualized by Mr. Manmohan Sharma, Executive Director of the VHAP, the panel was chaired Professor Krishan Sharma of the Department of Anthropology, PU, Chandigarh. The panelists were Professor Partha N. Mukherjee of Institute of Social Sciences (ISS), New Delhi, Dr. K. Gopal Iyer, Professor (Retired), Department of Sociology, PU and Dr.Kesar Singh, Senior Research Fellow, Centre for Research in Rural and Industrial Development (CRRID).
Introducing the theme of the panel discussion, Mr. Manmohan Sharma raised very important queries. What are the differences and commonalities between the just-held elections to the panchayati raj institutions and the ones held previously? How would the denial of political space to the opposition parties have implications for the future of electoral process in the state? Is there any chance of revival of militancy in Punjab with the increasing criminalization and corporatization of politics?
The panel discussion was organized to critically analyze the recent panchayat elections in Punjab and its implications on the existence and functioning of grassroot democratic institutions. The panelists discussed role of various stakeholders and the hindrances in proper execution of Panchayati Raj Institutions (PRIs) in the context of Punjab.
The panelists responded in interestingly different ways to these queries. Dr. Kesar Singh opened the discussion by giving a brief account of the evolution of PRIs in the country. The Directive Principles of State Policy of the Indian Constitution envisaged organization of village Panchayats at the grassroots level to function as units of Local Self Government. Panchayati Raj was adopted by state governments during the 1950s and 60s as laws were passed to establish Panchayats in various states. The government of India set up a committee in 1986, which recommended that the PRIs be constitutionally recognized. The Constitutional (73rd Amendment) Act, passed in 1992 by the Narasimha Rao Government provided constitutional sanction for establishing ‘democracy at the grassroots level’. The 73rd Amendment Act 1992 envisaged states to establish a three tier system of strong, viable and responsive panchayats at the village, intermediate and district levels. The constituttional amendment contains provision for devolution of powers and responsibilities to the panchayats for preparation of plans for economic development with social justice. It recommended for the devolution of twenty-nine subjects listed in the eleventh schedule of the constitution.
Sharing his experience about the recently held 12th Panchayat elections in Punjab, he pointed out how the administration in Punjab failed to protect the rights of contestants and the common citizens. The basic issues like food, sanitation, education, health and environment took a back seat in the election campaigns.
In his view these elections were the epitome of lawlessness, factional politics and exhibited the gross failure of the law and order machinery. The partisan intervention of ruling political parties’ and other discrepancies in the election procedures raises questions about the very credibility and integrity of institutions at the grassroots level. In such an environment there is very little scope for the empowerment of women – they are reduced to the status of dummy candidates. In this regard, he drew attention to the case of Barwali Khurd village of Fatehgarh District where out of the three women who polled the highest number of votes in rank order for three ‘general’ category seats, only one woman was declared elected, whilst the other two were replaced by two men candidates with vastly poor rankings! This was unheard of violation of the electoral procedure.
In the discussion that ensued, he emphasized that politics at the grassroots level should be looked in the context of globalization. Commodification of votes was taking place at an alarming rate with per voter cost rising up to Rs.3000 or more.
He lamented that while Punjab was earmarking a meagre one percent of the State GDP for PRIs, States like Kerala had made available nearly 40 percent to these institutions. He urged for much greater devolution of funds by the State to the PRIs to help its sagging social sector. His presentation opened up so many serious questions that all could not be addressed due to limitations of time. Are PRIs really accepted as the third tier of democracy? Where do PRIs figure in the Centre-State relations?