Historic-Indian-Election- 2014
Modi, Three-In-One: In
Triple Role
Indian elections' result 2014 crated history.
It fetched a landslide victory to Bhartiya Janta Party(BJP). But more than this,
it added two more feathers to India's well-established democracy. One, it
strengthened the institution of Indian democracy more than BJP, which is yet to
be noticed by our voters. Two, it transformed our age-old democracy into a two-party
system from single-party system in practice. Though, India has multi-party-system.
Still, this peculiarity is invisible, under the cover of magnetic flux of Charismatic Modi.
Indian
representative democracy is based on a multi-party-system in theory. This looks
good on paper but not in reality. There are four types of contesters in any
election, namely national party, regional party, registered party and
independents. In national elections the effective players are national parties
as compared to three others.
To be
a national party, a political party requires to secure at least six per cent of
the total votes polled in any four or more states and win four seats from any
state or states in Lok Sabha. Another criterion for a national party is that it
must secure a minimum two per cent
seats(11) of total (543) Lok Sabha seats. These eleven members must be elected from at least three different
states. Based on these criteria parties like BSP, CPI(M) having influence in a
few states, are national parties.
Like
many national parties, BSP has a strong hold in UP. It could not taste power
anywhere except UP. But, it enjoys national party stature. Technically it
fulfils the criteria. Theoretically, it
appears appealing. But practically, it does not discharge the duties of a national
party in true sense like putting candidates across the country to make
elections tougher, better and more representative. Similar conditions are with many other national parties.
After
independence, our country has predominantly single-party-system in practice till
2014.The Congress was exclusively single party which put candidates in most of
the states across the country. For the
first time, BJP behaved like Congress in putting candidates. AAP tried
the same without national tag but failed miserably. None other party put
candidates on national scale in true spirit of
being a national party.
In
fact, if we focus on ground reality, we find two-party-system in our democracy
in practice. Before 2014 election, it was predominantly single-party system with Congress in sight
practically. Even though, we have multi-party system in theory. Two and multi party systems have their inherent
merits and demerits. Single-party system is also in practice. America has
two-party system while China has single-party system.
We
select genius through competitions and try to elect genuine and reasonable candidates in elections. Tough and multi-cornered
competitions with national players
provide a better opportunity to select more meritorious candidates. In Indian elections,
all the four types of candidates testify their genuineness to be selected as MPs.
It would be better and healthier for the democratic system that if in national
elections, most of the candidates are from national parties rather than regional
and independents.
Generally, independents dominate the
list of candidates. National parties' candidates are few in numbers and most of
them are from name-sake national parties.
Such parties qualify technically and theoretically, but don't exist across
the country and have influence only in few states. Ideal situation is that in
national elections maximum candidates be
from national parties- excluding name-sake national parties. But ground reality
is opposite. Hence, contest in election is skewed and not as healthy as
expected.
In
such situation, we are not electing our representatives as our
constitution dreams and desires. In
national elections to parliament, a national player is fighting either with name-sake
national candidates, regional players or independents. This does not provide
healthy and sound contest for making our democracy stronger.
In
national game, national player should be in majority and it should be among
themselves. But ground reality is opposite in our national electoral games. Contests
are among a real national, name-sake national, regional and independent. This
makes whole election process skewed and against the spirit as envisaged in our
constitution. This does not seem healthy practice and conducive for our democracy.
There
are many name-sake national parties. They put candidates in a few selected
states of their regional influence. It is the Congress only that contests in whole country barring a few seats. To put a
tough and neck-to-neck competition against Congress, the BJP for the first time
contested in true sense on national scale to prove itself to be a true national
party in practice rather than in theory.
It came with flying colours too.
The 2014 election transformed our multi- party system into two- party system in
reality. Now, Congress and BJP are two national parties in true sense and
practice. Before this election, Congress was the only national party in practice
on ground.
BJP
gave tough fight to Congress and
decimated it. Congress could not even get sufficient MPs to become recognised
opposition party as per our constitutional norms in the Lok Sabha. In earlier elections, giant Cong contested with name-sake national, weak regional
and independents. As a result, Congress ruled India for most of the time. It
was possible because Cong did not get tough competition from real national
players- as they were on paper and not
on ground. As a single strong national player, Cong easily defeated name-sake nationals,
regionals, and independents.
In the
absence of true national parties on ground across the country, India witnessed single-party system in true
sense till 2014-Cong only. The dream and
wish of our constitution is that our multi-party contest for healthy election
and genuine representative pick, buy it could not take shape in reality and
practice. Though, multi-party system is very much on paper and theoretically it
sounds very attractive and appealing.
Modi played a triple role in 2014 election.
Hence, he is three-In-One. Rest of them not performed even role of One-In-One. But,
we are under-crediting Modi with only 33% on ground for bringing landslide
victory to BJP. Rest of two roles are neither in discussion nor visible.
First,
Modi championed in elevating BJP as true national party on ground and in providing
majority to it. Additionally, he
decorated his cap with two more feathers. Second, he strengthened democracy by strategically
pushing our election to a tougher and sound competition on national scale. Third,
he helped in transforming a single-party system into a two-party system in true
sense and reality. Albeit, we talked of multi-party, which is more on paper
than ground.
Modi created
history in 2014 election. He served the nation along with his party, BJP. His
one of the three achievements is in discussion. His two achievements unnoticed
by voters are namely-his national services for remodelling and enhancing party-system
and strengthening of democratic system as well as process. These two great
historic accomplishments are still not in limelight.
Reference:
1. http://eci.nic.in/archive/press/current/PN05122k.htm
2. http://www.scribd.com/doc/101760791/Merit-and-Demerits-of-Multiparty-System
3. http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/home/opinion/edit-page/A-truly-historic-win/articleshow/35527568.cms
4.
No comments:
Post a Comment