WEDNESDAY, APRIL 24, 2024
In the previous article titled ‘Democracy as popular control’ (Herald Edit, September 24), I had suggested three causes for our infirm democracy, the weakening of the federal system in India, the nature of the party and electoral system, and the transformation in the character of the media. A fourth dimension can be added, i.e., the change in the nature of land from an instrument of production in agriculture, to a commodity that can be traded in the market. The process of this transformation in the nature of land calls for a separate discussion which, unfortunately, I cannot do it here. I shall, therefore, only focus on the party and electoral system in Goa which has aided and accelerated this growth in the market for land that is a major source of political power.
To achieve this power, prospective MLAs must achieve organisational power, become members of political parties. Political parties everywhere are intermediary organisations that stand between the citizen and the state performing, among its many functions, the useful one of making a restless citizenry quiescent. Aspiring individuals have thus to acquire status and power within a party, get positional advantage before elections, become ‘winnable’ and be able to ‘check-mate the opposition’. It is these two roles, ‘winnability’ and capacity to ‘check-mate the opposition’ that explains the power of defectors.
The party system in Goa
The party system in Goa transformed in the 1970s from a contest between two local parties, the UGP and the MGP, into a competition between two national parties. The rot of defections can be traced to the event when the whole Congress (U) switched to the Congress (I) after the Emergency of 1975. The cannibalisation of the UG party by the Congress began the process of displacing local parties by national parties and got accelerated when the BJP entered the field in the 1990s.
This conversion, from local party competition to national party competition, is the first big factor that has led to the erosion of democratic politics in Goa, giving a lie to the claim that only a national party can bring development to the State. The opposite has, in fact, been the case. (i) By joining a national party, the locus of power has shifted from Goa to Delhi with national power brokers in Delhi dominating all major decisions concerning Goa. (ii) It reduces local leaders in Goa to Delhi’s serfs. Make no mistake. (iii) In the national calculus, therefore, Goa then becomes just another factor, useful when it serves the national party, dispensable when it does not. There is no primary concern with Goa’s development.
The Electoral system
Further, since occupying a position in the State gives one access to State patronage, competitive elections are held to adorn such power with the veneer of democratic legitimacy. Competitive elections, in the Indian discourse of democracy, are regarded as the main source of democratic legitimacy. It is presented as the primary factor of ‘popular control’. Periodic elections which are free and fair — as ours are — allow citizens in a democracy to select those who are to represent them. While there are many aspects of elections from getting a ticket to carrying out a campaign to even taking oaths in temples to assuage voter unease, etc, it is the party that is central to elections. Independents rarely win. Citizens therefore do not choose candidates to represent them but instead choose among those candidates who are offered them by political parties.
Already you can see the hand of the high command. The opacity in the choice of candidates is manifested here. In Goa with small constituencies (less than 30,000 of total votes) a winning candidate must poll, on a generous estimate, about 40% of the total registered votes. In the first past the post system (FPTP) that we have adopted a winning candidate needs to get only a majority of votes polled, which is often a minority of the electorate. Most winners in Goa have polled less than 50% of the registered votes. The FPTP system is the second major factor in defections since in small States like Goa.
Constituency capture
Because managing a constituency is so vital, politicians have emerged who can control election outcomes because they have created a support base that goes with them wherever they go, into party A or party B. In Goa politicians, strongmen, have emerged who control more than one constituency. This phenomenon of constituency capture is an outcome of constituency size. It gives the MLA the power to negotiate with parties from a position of strength because of winnability. Making concessions to winnability, is the third major factor in defections. Reforming the FPTP system and changing it to a PR system will introduce greater uncertainty in election. This electoral reform can only be for the good.
(Peter Ronald deSouza is the DD Kosambi visiting professor
at Goa University)
