Futile obsession?

The controversy surrounding the opening ceremony of the new Parliament building has buried fathom deep many real issues associated with the functioning of Parliamentary democracy in India. Our politicians are pundits in transforming genuine people's concerns into insignificant matters, while treating non-issues as sensitive subjects. They are adept at manipulating people's emotions, demonstrating their skills in political engineering.

At one point in time, Gujarat Vidyapeeth, a deemed university founded by MK Gandhi during the colonial administration, was locked by the British administration. As the chancellor of the institution, Gandhi was informed by the teachers about the situation, seeking his opinion and advice. In response, Gandhi remarked that only the building was locked, not the educational activities. He reminded the teachers that education resided within them and the students, emphasising that the building was insignificant compared to the activities conducted within it. This realisation made the teachers understand that the building itself was immaterial, while the activities carried out inside were of real importance.

In a similar vein, our politicians are talking about the building, which is a non-issue; and not the activities to be carried out in the building, which are the real issues.

Representative democracy exists and enhances its credibility through the functioning of representative institutions such as the Parliament, state legislatures, and local bodies. The need for these institutions is justified by the quality and quantity of transactions they facilitate. In the evolution of governance arrangement for human society, the parliamentary system is the latest but not the final best instrument for governance. In a parliamentary democracy, political parties have two main functions: interest aggregation and interest articulation. Interest aggregation involves collecting people's problems through party functionaries and legislators, processing them, and presenting them in the appropriate authoritative bodies. Interest articulation refers to communicating the processed problems and issues of society, collected from the people, in the authoritative bodies like the Parliament, state legislatures, and local bodies, by the elected representatives of the people. Interest aggregation occurs outside the authoritative bodies, while interest articulation takes place within the Parliament and state legislatures.

Both are highly professional jobs that should be performed with professionalism by the party functionaries, both outside and inside the authoritative bodies of the legislators. In order for elected representatives to effectively carry out these responsibilities, they are provided with the necessary facilities by the political parties. Additionally, several privileges have been granted to them. However, unless elected representatives possess the skills, capacity, and knowledge regarding the potential of the bodies such as the Parliament, state legislatures, and local bodies, they cannot perform their duties scientifically and professionally, nor can they fully utilise the capacity of these institutions.

Currently, parliamentary function serves as little more than a ritual and ceremony. Intellectuals have repeatedly indicated that parliamentary institutions have been in decline, not only in our country but also in many other countries practicing parliamentary democracy since the Second World War. Research reports have highlighted a significant gap between the potential of these institutions and the capacity of elected representatives to harness that potential.

It has been reiterated time and again that unless the capacity of legislators is enhanced, the potential of parliamentary institutions cannot be effectively utilised to solve people's problems through authoritative decisions, policies, and allocation of resources. Regrettably, the capacity building of legislators remains a neglected subject in discussions on parliamentary democracy.

Constructing a new building for our Parliament, equipped with modern equipment and facilities, is the need of the hour to meet contextual requirements. State-of-the-art facilities are being provided, and legislators must use the facilities and opportunities created within the institutions in a professional manner. This necessitates extensive training, capacity building, and orientation for elected representatives in the legislative institutions. It is essential to establish a highly specialised training institution for this purpose. Without training from a specialised agency, one cannot expect meaningful contributions from members of the Parliament during parliamentary debates. Unfortunately, the current scenario in the Parliament is marked by acrimonious arguments and continuous pandemonium.

In the last 75 years, no worthwhile training institution has been created for the capacity building of members of the Parliament, except for the Bureau of Parliamentary Studies and Training, a small unit that offers appreciation courses on parliamentary procedures and practices. When comparing India with other well-functioning parliamentary institutions, it becomes apparent that India is lacking in two aspects: legislative research and the skilling of legislators. Insufficient resources are being invested in these areas, as highlighted by public intellectuals on multiple occasions.

During the opening ceremony, our politicians created a commotion over who should inaugurate the building, which is an insignificant matter. The significant issue at hand is evaluating the functioning of the Parliament over the past 74 years, acknowledging its achievements and shortcomings. Another crucial matter is the establishment of a training institution to enhance the capacity of legislators. We have specialised academic and research institutions for various fields such as tribal studies, rural studies, development studies, and management studies. Similarly, why can’t a university for parliamentary studies or legislative studies be created? It will serve both the research and training needs of the members and institutions. This idea had been advocated for many years by TN Seshan, the former Election Commissioner. Eventually, he assisted a private institution in providing training for willing politicians, preparing professionals to support our legislators. This institution is now convening a meeting of Indian legislators to discuss issues pertaining to legislative institutions. If the discussion is focused on substantive issues of parliamentary democracy, then it becomes meaningful. Unfortunately, our politics often revolves around non-issues rather than addressing real concerns. The significant matter to contemplate is how to effectively utilise the new facilities to improve the functioning of parliamentary institutions, rather than focusing solely on the building and the individuals involved.

The writer is a former Professor and Rajiv Gandhi Chair for Panchayati Raj Studies, Gandhigram Rural Institute. Views expressed are personal