'My concern is that due to the concentration of power at the central government, the Southern states have already started to feel like informal colonies of the union government," said Brittas.
'The prevailing sentiment seems to be that if you excel, you thrive, but now it appears to be a situation where if you excel, you risk perishing.' (South First)
The upcoming general election in 2024 will be influenced by policy discussions, and the outcome of the polls will provide insights into how these policies are likely to be put into practice.
These discussions encompass a range of critical topics, including delimitation, the concept of “One Nation, One Election”, and the state of the media in India.
South First caught up with John Brittas, CPI(M) leader and a Rajya Sabha member from Kerala, on the sidelines of Dakshin Dialogues 2023 conclave in Bengaluru. He shared his thoughts on these issues, and shed light on their potential impact on the nation in the future.
Edited excerpts from the interview:
Q. Prime Minister Narendra Modi broached the subject of delimitation for the first time during a recent rally in Telangana. He stated that delimitation is guided by judicial decisions and expressed concerns that the Congress’s push for equal representation based on population, particularly in the context of caste census, might lead to a reduction in the number of seats allocated to South India. What are your thoughts on the prime minister’s statement?
A. I’m surprised that the BJP has been caught on the wrong foot regarding the caste census or survey undertaken in Bihar. It is evident that the backward classes are overwhelmingly the majority communities in Bihar and there is a demand for caste census elsewhere also. So, this Other Backward Class (OBC) factor made a dent in the BJP’s prospects. That’s the fear and apprehension of the prime minister. He has now linked it with delimitation.
I disagree with the assertion that delimitation is solely a judicial decision. In 2001, constituencies were locked in for an additional 25 years based on a consensus among various political parties, and this decision was formally adopted by the Indian Parliament.
Notably, the Bill was ratified with the active participation of none other than (senior BJP leader) Arun Jaitley.
It is essential to clarify that delimitation is not primarily a judicial decision. Instead, the judicial aspect typically comes into play with the Delimitation Commission, where a judge or former judge assumes the responsibility of determining how a constituency should be delineated or shaped.
On the one hand, the decision to increase the number of seats should either align with population growth or consider the specific concerns and needs of the Southern states. These decisions inherently involve political considerations and must be approached carefully.
There is a prevailing sense of unease among the Southern states regarding the process of delimitation. They perceive it as a potential threat to their political representation, akin to a double-edged sword hanging over them. This concern has its roots in the prime minister’s recent statement. He emphasised that if the sole criterion for seat allocation is population-based, it could result in a substantial reduction in the number of seats allotted to the South.
My concern is that due to the concentration of power at the Centre, the Southern states have already started to feel like informal colonies of the Union government. If the delimitation process is executed primarily based on population criteria, I fear that the Southern states will transition from being informal colonies to formal colonies of North India. The prevailing sentiment is that if you excel, you thrive; but now it appears to be a situation where if you excel, you risk perishing.
Q. The Congress has not taken any stand regarding the upcoming delimitation in 2026. What is the official stand of the CPI(M)?
A. Our stance is unequivocal. When this issue arose 22 years ago in 2001, we asserted that the unique circumstances and sensibilities of states that effectively implemented the policies and strategies of the Union government while managing their population growth should be considered. In other words, merely because we controlled our population it shouldn’t be used as a rationale to deny us our rightful representation in the Lok Sabha. We remain steadfast in our position on this matter.
Q. While it is clear that delimitation is a constitutional mandate, you have raised concerns about the South potentially becoming a formal colony of the North due to the delimitation process. On the other hand, there is the moral imperative of providing equal representation to an equal number of people while electing their parliamentarians or legislative assembly members. How do you envision these dynamics affecting the people, and what do you consider to be a viable solution to this challenge?
A. You are saying that it is important to ensure each person’s vote is proportionally reflected in their representation. However, it is concerning to see that a significant portion of our country’s population is being excluded from various spheres, including the executive, judiciary, legislature, bureaucracy, and even the media. This exclusion perpetuates the underrepresentation of certain communities, which appears to be a deliberate practice.
Imagine a country with a population of 20 crore where a particular segment lacks representation in the executive — it is similar to disenfranchising the Muslim community in India. This is an issue that warrants genuine concern and attention.
Q. Before the special parliamentary session, there was significant discourse about the concept of “One Nation, One Election”, even though it didn’t make its way to Parliament. However, a committee was established under former President Ramnath Kovind to explore this idea. Do you believe this concept will be beneficial, or do you anticipate it will impact the federal structure of the country?
A. It seems that the ruling dispensation is making every effort to consolidate power, and their approach appears to promote a concentration of authority. The logical progression of this argument leads to a scenario of one leader, one ideology, one culture, one language, and, as you mentioned, one election. This overarching slogan seems to be their underlying objective.
Furthermore, there is a narrative that democracy is expensive. However, I must question this perspective. Even if democracy is costly, what is the alternative? Would we prefer monarchy, despotism, or oligarchy?
Q. There are arguments surrounding the concept of “One Nation, One Election” that it could reduce election expenditure, besides saving time. What is your take on these arguments?
A. Those people who think that they need to micromanage all elections are the problem. Those people sitting in Delhi think one or two leaders need to be everywhere to manage the elections. That is the psyche of those people. But the psyche of the nation is different. If there is an election in Haryana, how does it affect Karnataka or Tamil Nadu?
These states have their unique concerns and priorities, and they don’t necessarily get entangled in the elections of other regions.
Moreover, there is no substantial evidence to support the claim that policy paralysis or delays in policy decisions have occurred due to elections.
The most significant issue that is mostly disregarded is the substantial role of black money in election spending by political parties.
In terms of election expenses, official records show that all political parties combined spent approximately ₹3,000 crore during the last Lok Sabha election. However, it’s widely acknowledged that the actual expenditure for the last election far exceeded ₹60,000 crore. Notably, it’s estimated that the BJP alone spent around ₹50,000 crore.
Q. What reforms do you propose to the electoral system that will benefit not only the current generation but also the generations to come?
A. Numerous reports have been submitted to the government of India offering solutions to reduce the influence of money and muscle power in elections. These reports have discussed various approaches, including the possibility of state funding for elections. In this scenario, political parties recognised and authorised by the Election Commission would rely on state funding, aiming to eliminate the influx of black money into the electoral process.
However, it is disconcerting that every action taken by the current government seems to move towards making the electoral landscape more opaque. For example, take the case of electoral bonds. It’s perplexing that in a country striving for transparent elections, opaque financial instruments like electoral bonds have been introduced.
Additionally, the Supreme Court has rightly emphasised the need for an independent election commission. Yet, the government’s proposed amendment suggests that the executive will have a say in determining the composition of the election commissioners. This is a departure from the principles of an impartial and independent electoral system.
It appears that the government’s actions are not aligned with the image of transparency and fairness they aim to project. Rather, it seems they are more inclined towards consolidating power in a unilateral administration.
Q. The recent events involving NewsClick and the questioning and arrest of journalists under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) are deeply concerning. The UAPA, originally meant to address issues related to terrorism, has been criticised for its vague and broad provisions, which can potentially be misused to target individuals, including journalists, who dissent. How do you see the invocation of the UAPA against journalists?
A. This serves as a clear warning to every journalist: Criticising the government or its leaders is not permitted. It is as straightforward as that. Recently, a statement from a so-called investor has caught my attention. This investor claims that their investment was transparent, and they are willing to cooperate with any government investigation.
The funds that have flowed into NewsClick are said to be proceeds from the sale of a firm by a person named Neville Roy Singham. Since 2021, enforcement agencies have been scrutinising everyone, yet no substantial findings have emerged. Even if there is a charge sheet or remand notice, it is unclear if the government or the Delhi Police have shared any significant information with the public.
Let us consider the stance against the farm laws. History has shown that agitations and dissent have played a significant role in shaping our country. If this is the case, should the prime minister, who withdrew the farm bills, be implicated? Moreover, trade between China and India has surged under the NDA government.
I once questioned Minister Piyush Goyal about the trade deficit between China and India. During the initial days of this government, the deficit was $48 billion, and it has since doubled. The explanation provided was that we are importing machinery and components to strengthen our manufacturing sector. However, it is essential to scrutinise companies that have invested in digital payment firms and the contributions made by Chinese companies to PM-CARE. This leads to the question: Why didn’t the Delhi Police involve the PMO in this matter?
Free media is indispensable for a democracy to thrive. Without it, democracy cannot truly exist, even if you have functioning legislative and judicial branches. The media, which once played a pivotal role in resisting oppressive actions, is now facing suppression in the form of the UAPA. This is arguably the darkest hour for Indian journalism, as organised media entities seem to lack the resistance and vigour they exhibited during the Emergency.
Dakshin Dialogues is South First‘s annual thought conclave that brings together South India’s biggest political and judicial minds, and social activists, on one stage.
While federalism was the primary theme of last year’s event, it was the core of each session this year, too, as South First continues to focus on the other half of the India story.
Dakshin Dialogues 2023 saw the likes of Vidadala Rajini, Khushbu Sundar, Shashi Tharoor, Palanivel Thiaga Rajan, Dinesh Gundu Rao, and many others, discussing delimitation, the Southern model of governance, and much more.
Watch the full event here:
May 09, 2024
May 09, 2024
May 09, 2024
May 09, 2024
May 09, 2024
May 09, 2024
