Why House needs heroes
7 May 2012 2:55 AM GMT
Recently, I had gone to an art supplier’s shop to buy canvases and paints for an upcoming exhibition of mine and on the busy teeming pavement outside the shop, I saw an old frail man in shabby dhoti and kurta sitting quietly on a stool in the hot sun, unfazed by the heat and cacophony. Entering the shop I noticed there was some altercation going on between the young shop owner and an irate customer over the price of some items. The customer was yelling at the top of his lungs demanding a discount which he claimed he had got previously from the adamant owner, who was now telling the customer to get lost, when I noticed the old man come into the shop quietly and shuffle up to the owner. He drew him aside and spoke with him for some time in which the younger man lost his truculence noticeably. Soon, the owner and the customer settled the matter between themselves. After I was done, I asked the shopkeeper who the old man was and he told me he was his father, and the man who had started the business 40 years ago. It had been a small hole in the wall affair then, selling notebooks, pens and pencils, but had flourished since. Though retired now, the father still came to the shop and sat outside on his stool until closing hours, though he took no part in the day to day business of the shop.
I thought no more of this incident until a few days later when the media was abuzz with the news that Sachin Tendulkar had been chosen to be a Rajya Sabha MP, nominated by the Congress. What was the need, went the popular lament, for Sachin to have willingly dragged himself into the quagmire of politics and the company of self serving, unethical and manipulative creatures? Parliament after all, as everyone 'knows', and as Team Anna have repeatedly dinned into us, is a cesspool of scams and corruption where one must jettison ones ethics and principles in order to thrive and succeed.
Triggered by the Sachin episode, the whole idea of Article 80 has come under question in this climate of doubt and cynicism. This bitter view of the highest institution of the land, and the disenchantment with those we have voted to power, given the scams and scandals that have rocked us over the last few years, has blurred our understanding of the way democracy works, to the extent that we now do not distinguish between the two houses of Parliament when tarring it with our opprobrium. Of what purpose are all these celebrities in the Upper House? How are they effective? Renowned artistes, filmmakers and writers, all former Rajya Sabha MP’s found themselves in the media justifying their terms in office and how they spent the money allotted to them.
One of the earliest traces of bicameralism may be found in Homer’s Iliad which records a meeting in which Agamemnon the Greek general, along with others, make a decision in council and then summon the troops to ratify this decision, datable to a war that occurs around 1250 BC.
Recognisable bicameral institutions first arose in medieval Europe where they were associated with separate representation of different estates of the realm. For example, one house would represent the aristocracy, and the other would represent the commoners. The Founding Fathers of the United States also favoured a bicameral legislature. According to President James Madison, the Senate was created to be a stabilising force, elected not by mass electors, but selected by the State legislators. Senators would be more knowledgeable and more deliberate – a sort of republican nobility – and a counter to what Madison saw as the 'fickleness and passion' that could absorb the House.
In India, by adopting the principle of nomination in the Rajya Sabha, the Constitution has also ensured that the nation must also receive services of at least 12 of the most distinguished persons of the country who have earned distinction in their field of activity. By doing this the State not only recognises their merit and confers honour on them, but also enables them to enrich the debates by their expertise and knowledge that they have in different areas.
Speaking about the nominated members, Jawaharlal Nehru said in the House of the People on 13 May 1953: ‘The President has nominated some members of the Council of States who, if I may say so, are among the most distinguished, taking everybody in Parliament altogether – it is true, distinguished in arts, science, etc. – and our Constitution in its wisdom gave that. They do not represent political parties or anything, but they represent really the high watermark of literature or art or culture or whatever it may be.'
But more often than not they represent sane counsel, a greater measure of sobriety, of wisdom, and historical perspective because of the fact that they are not mere professional politicians but men and women with a higher intellect who have attained distinctions in other walks of life.
More than any other period of our post independence history, we are faced with illiterate and semi literate leaders without a sense of history, culture or aesthetics, who by majoritarian mandate threaten today to make a mockery of our democratic institutions and secular values. Many of these are also criminals and lumpens. More than ever before, in Parliament, we need the equivalent of that seemingly redundant old man outside the art shop who spoke sense into his son in the calm voice of diplomacy and reason, preventing an unpleasant incident.
We need those who can prevent the tendency of immature politicians to seize upon a sudden impulse and initiate rash legislation. We need MPs who have participated wholeheartedly, and used the MP funds constructively for a greater good. One hopes that Tendulkar, young though he may be, will distinguish himself in the Rajya Sabha as well as he has in the cricket field and wishes him all the best.
Gautam Benegal is a writer, national award winning animation filmmaker, cartoonist and artist.
I thought no more of this incident until a few days later when the media was abuzz with the news that Sachin Tendulkar had been chosen to be a Rajya Sabha MP, nominated by the Congress. What was the need, went the popular lament, for Sachin to have willingly dragged himself into the quagmire of politics and the company of self serving, unethical and manipulative creatures? Parliament after all, as everyone 'knows', and as Team Anna have repeatedly dinned into us, is a cesspool of scams and corruption where one must jettison ones ethics and principles in order to thrive and succeed.
Triggered by the Sachin episode, the whole idea of Article 80 has come under question in this climate of doubt and cynicism. This bitter view of the highest institution of the land, and the disenchantment with those we have voted to power, given the scams and scandals that have rocked us over the last few years, has blurred our understanding of the way democracy works, to the extent that we now do not distinguish between the two houses of Parliament when tarring it with our opprobrium. Of what purpose are all these celebrities in the Upper House? How are they effective? Renowned artistes, filmmakers and writers, all former Rajya Sabha MP’s found themselves in the media justifying their terms in office and how they spent the money allotted to them.
One of the earliest traces of bicameralism may be found in Homer’s Iliad which records a meeting in which Agamemnon the Greek general, along with others, make a decision in council and then summon the troops to ratify this decision, datable to a war that occurs around 1250 BC.
Recognisable bicameral institutions first arose in medieval Europe where they were associated with separate representation of different estates of the realm. For example, one house would represent the aristocracy, and the other would represent the commoners. The Founding Fathers of the United States also favoured a bicameral legislature. According to President James Madison, the Senate was created to be a stabilising force, elected not by mass electors, but selected by the State legislators. Senators would be more knowledgeable and more deliberate – a sort of republican nobility – and a counter to what Madison saw as the 'fickleness and passion' that could absorb the House.
In India, by adopting the principle of nomination in the Rajya Sabha, the Constitution has also ensured that the nation must also receive services of at least 12 of the most distinguished persons of the country who have earned distinction in their field of activity. By doing this the State not only recognises their merit and confers honour on them, but also enables them to enrich the debates by their expertise and knowledge that they have in different areas.
Speaking about the nominated members, Jawaharlal Nehru said in the House of the People on 13 May 1953: ‘The President has nominated some members of the Council of States who, if I may say so, are among the most distinguished, taking everybody in Parliament altogether – it is true, distinguished in arts, science, etc. – and our Constitution in its wisdom gave that. They do not represent political parties or anything, but they represent really the high watermark of literature or art or culture or whatever it may be.'
But more often than not they represent sane counsel, a greater measure of sobriety, of wisdom, and historical perspective because of the fact that they are not mere professional politicians but men and women with a higher intellect who have attained distinctions in other walks of life.
More than any other period of our post independence history, we are faced with illiterate and semi literate leaders without a sense of history, culture or aesthetics, who by majoritarian mandate threaten today to make a mockery of our democratic institutions and secular values. Many of these are also criminals and lumpens. More than ever before, in Parliament, we need the equivalent of that seemingly redundant old man outside the art shop who spoke sense into his son in the calm voice of diplomacy and reason, preventing an unpleasant incident.
We need those who can prevent the tendency of immature politicians to seize upon a sudden impulse and initiate rash legislation. We need MPs who have participated wholeheartedly, and used the MP funds constructively for a greater good. One hopes that Tendulkar, young though he may be, will distinguish himself in the Rajya Sabha as well as he has in the cricket field and wishes him all the best.
Gautam Benegal is a writer, national award winning animation filmmaker, cartoonist and artist.
Next Story
