An article from the Times of India.
Apparently stunned by the high level of income that has been disclosed by some of the candidates in their election affidavits, the income-tax department has suo motu decided to take up 50 such affidavits and investigate further to ascertain whether I-T for the same has been paid for.
...
Among the 50 such affidavits they are taking up for immediate action include that of Congress candidate from Vijayawada Lok Sabha seat Lagadapati Rajagopal (Rs 229 crore); PRP president Chiranjeevi, candidate from Tirupati and Palakole assembly seats (Rs 88 crore); PRP general secretary and Anakapalli LS seat candidate Allu Aravind (Rs 24 crore); Nizamabad LS Congress candidate Madhu Yaskhi Goud and TDP’s nominee from Kadapa LS seat P Srikanth Reddy (Rs 30 crore each).
I-T sources said the objective of taking these affidavits for scrutiny was to find out whether the candidates were paying income tax for the assets they have declared. “But we will also probe the assets of the family members and that will help us unearth black money or assets for which tax has not been paid. Normally, such scrutiny will take at least two years to be completed. But in these 50-odd cases, we plan to complete the probe in three months,” one official said.
Read the full article here.
Wednesday, April 8, 2009
Election Commission rules that columns in affidavits cannot be left blank
To prevent candidates from suppressing facts in their affidavits, the Election Commission has ruled that the nominees cannot leave any column of the form blank, a top electoral officer said. But he made it clear that contestants cannot be barred from the poll fray for giving false information in the affidavit. As per a Supreme Court ruling, candidature cannot be cancelled for giving false information or suppressing facts, reports Yahoo.com.
Nomination cannot be cancelled for false affidavit
To prevent candidates from suppressing facts in their affidavits, the Election Commission has ruled that the nominees cannot leave any column of the form blank, a top electoral officer said here Monday.
But he made it clear that contestants cannot be barred from the poll fray for giving false information in the affidavit.
'The EC has come out with two advisories on candidates' affidavits. Firstly, the affidavits have to be typed and not handwritten. This was done as a section of candidates in some states used to give handwritten affidavits, which were illegible,' said West Bengal Chief Electoral Officer Debasish Sen.
'Another problem was suppression of information by some candidates, who used to leave some of the columns blank. So, in another advisory, the EC has said none of the columns can be left vacant. The candidate has to write at least 'nil' or 'not applicable' in those columns in which he has nothing to add,' Sen said after inaugurating the state chapter of the National Election Watch.
But as per a Supreme Court ruling, candidature cannot be cancelled for giving false information or suppressing facts. 'This is because the system of filing affidavit was introduced much after the electoral laws came into force'.
Read more on Indian Elections here.
Nomination cannot be cancelled for false affidavit
To prevent candidates from suppressing facts in their affidavits, the Election Commission has ruled that the nominees cannot leave any column of the form blank, a top electoral officer said here Monday.
But he made it clear that contestants cannot be barred from the poll fray for giving false information in the affidavit.
'The EC has come out with two advisories on candidates' affidavits. Firstly, the affidavits have to be typed and not handwritten. This was done as a section of candidates in some states used to give handwritten affidavits, which were illegible,' said West Bengal Chief Electoral Officer Debasish Sen.
'Another problem was suppression of information by some candidates, who used to leave some of the columns blank. So, in another advisory, the EC has said none of the columns can be left vacant. The candidate has to write at least 'nil' or 'not applicable' in those columns in which he has nothing to add,' Sen said after inaugurating the state chapter of the National Election Watch.
But as per a Supreme Court ruling, candidature cannot be cancelled for giving false information or suppressing facts. 'This is because the system of filing affidavit was introduced much after the electoral laws came into force'.
Read more on Indian Elections here.
Empowering India in Pondicherry University
We hope that citizens find the data on Empoweing India useful. In that light it is heartening to receive feedback about the initiative. Below is a note by a political science student, Priyanka - who has helped us earlier to digitize TN affidavits.
Utility of Empowering India
Our Political Science department had recently organized a programme to increase awareness about the elections in the college and we had invited a Mr.Venkatasubramaniam, the ex-vice chancellor of Pondicherry University. In his address, he spoke very highly of the efforts the Empowering India is making and encouraged all the students to avail of its resources.
~ Priyanka
Utility of Empowering India
Our Political Science department had recently organized a programme to increase awareness about the elections in the college and we had invited a Mr.Venkatasubramaniam, the ex-vice chancellor of Pondicherry University. In his address, he spoke very highly of the efforts the Empowering India is making and encouraged all the students to avail of its resources.
~ Priyanka
Tuesday, April 7, 2009
Some thoughts on electoral reforms in India
Below is a piece mailed to us by a citizen - Mr Chudamani Ratnam. These are good, debatable points. We put it here for the open discussions, knowing that you would have lots to contribute. Take a look and do respond.
Electoral Reforms in India
It appears that there are some 700+ Mayors of towns in the USA. Some time ago, around 2006-7, at their annual conclave, under the Chairmanship of the Mayor of Seattle, they adopted a resolution to implement certain far reaching environmental protection measures. This was at a time when the US Federal Administration had a somewhat negative attitude towards such green policies. I e-mailed the Mayor of Seattle congratulating the mayors on their wisdom and went on to suggest that democracy in the USA would be better served if the Houses of Congress were abolished and the country governed by a President elected by the Mayors. Unfortunately I didn’t get a reply.
Leading on from such ideas it seems to me that elections in their present form in India should be abolished. People would only vote to elect their Panchayats, redefined to include municipal corporations, etc. These bodies would form an electoral college to elect the state assemblies. Candidates for the state assemblies need not be members of the Panchayat, but should be voters in that state. At the next higher level, the state assemblies would form another electoral college to elect the national assembly, i.e. Lok Sabha, not unlike the way the present Rajya Sabha is elected. The Lok Sabha would elect the Prime Minister and Cabinet, who need not be members of the Lok Sabha, again bearing some similarities to the US system.
It may be wishful thinking on my part but I can see some advantages over the present Indian system. To start with this proposal would be administratively much simpler and the deployment of thousands of paramilitary forces may not be needed. The criminal element would be hopefully eliminated beyond the panchayat stage and politics would be accessible to a better class of citizen. More sophisticated electoral processes such as the second transferable vote can be implemented at the electoral college stages. Lastly money may no longer be a factor in politics.
~ By Chudamani Ratnam
Electoral Reforms in India
It appears that there are some 700+ Mayors of towns in the USA. Some time ago, around 2006-7, at their annual conclave, under the Chairmanship of the Mayor of Seattle, they adopted a resolution to implement certain far reaching environmental protection measures. This was at a time when the US Federal Administration had a somewhat negative attitude towards such green policies. I e-mailed the Mayor of Seattle congratulating the mayors on their wisdom and went on to suggest that democracy in the USA would be better served if the Houses of Congress were abolished and the country governed by a President elected by the Mayors. Unfortunately I didn’t get a reply.
Leading on from such ideas it seems to me that elections in their present form in India should be abolished. People would only vote to elect their Panchayats, redefined to include municipal corporations, etc. These bodies would form an electoral college to elect the state assemblies. Candidates for the state assemblies need not be members of the Panchayat, but should be voters in that state. At the next higher level, the state assemblies would form another electoral college to elect the national assembly, i.e. Lok Sabha, not unlike the way the present Rajya Sabha is elected. The Lok Sabha would elect the Prime Minister and Cabinet, who need not be members of the Lok Sabha, again bearing some similarities to the US system.
It may be wishful thinking on my part but I can see some advantages over the present Indian system. To start with this proposal would be administratively much simpler and the deployment of thousands of paramilitary forces may not be needed. The criminal element would be hopefully eliminated beyond the panchayat stage and politics would be accessible to a better class of citizen. More sophisticated electoral processes such as the second transferable vote can be implemented at the electoral college stages. Lastly money may no longer be a factor in politics.
~ By Chudamani Ratnam
Crores poured for the General Elections 2009
Spending is zooming as it has become a ritual to bribe voters
- Overall estimated expense on election 2009: Rs 10,000-16,000 crore. Doesn't include non-cash "gifts", about 25% is cash bribes
- In a constituency with 4 candidates: Rs 1 crore approximate authorised expenditure. Rs 5-16 crore actual expenditure
- Cash bribes from candidates spent on liquor, repaying loans, daily expenses and other essentials that cannot wait—usually unproductive expenditure
- The average cash handout is expected to rise, according to a CMS survey, from Rs 100 per person in election 2004, to Rs 500 this year
- Election expenses likely to be about 0.2% of the GDP in 2009; not significant by itself, except that the entire sum is spent over just one month
Some describe it as the third stimulus package, after two official ones, for an economy that's hardly in the pink of health.
Others dismiss it as a national phenomenon. Either way, as India prepares to vote in a new government this May, the polls are also a once-in-a-five-year chance for many voters to make a quick buck. This year, election-related expenses—official and unofficial—are expected to zoom: From Rs 4,500 crore in 2004, to anything between Rs 10,000-16,000 crore.
And yes, urban as well as rural voters are expected to line up for illegal cash benefits and other freebies. Of this, 80 per cent is likely to be spe nt out of the pocket of individual candidates (the Election Commission limits their pre-poll expenses to Rs 25 lakh). "It's an under-estimation, but we believe that each successful candidate could spend Rs 5 crore in his or her constituency. It was half this figure in the previous national vote," says N. Bhaskara Rao, chairman of the Centre for Media Studies (CMS), an independent think-tank.
Add spending by minor candidates, and the numbers grow exponentially for each constituency.
There are 543 constituencies for the Lok Sabha, and a major one, with three or more candidates, could be worth Rs 5-16 crore in expenses. The estimates, made by CMS, are based on two surveys it conducted in 2007 and 2008 across income groups. "The spending—Rs 10,000 crore, which is the minimum we expect—is unimaginable. It's never happened at this scale before," says Rao.
What's worrying is that politicians don't bribe in the actual hope of winning. "I don't believe that Indian voters are electing the leader who pays them the most money, or selecting one who gives them more immediate gratification—a TV set, a sari or blankets," says Bhibhu Mohapatra, a Fellow with the India Development Foundation (IDF), a research outfit based in New Delhi.
Mohapatra thinks that pre-election bribes have more cynical underpinnings: "It has become a ritual, a habit, to bribe voters. A candidate cannot ensure his victory by giving a freebie or a cash 'reward'. But by not bribing at all, he ensures defeat in electoral sweepstakes," says Mohapatra. In its own study conducted in New Delhi prior to elections to the Delhi assembly last year, IDF found that almost all slum clusters and colonies were supplied with liquor and cash, in some places free food and snacks. In most clusters, the community elder was approached with the bribe.
Interestingly, the report says, "This was practised by at least three national parties in Delhi," implying that even candidates who don't expect to win use liquor "pouches" and cash—of Rs 500 per voter or thereabouts—only to ensure they stay in the running.
IDF's survey was conducted between October 18 and November 24, 2008; 3,000 households from the Below Poverty Line (BPL) and Above Poverty Line (APL) categories were interviewed for it."If Rs 25 lakh is the officially allowed limit, and Rs 5 crore is actually being spent, then the difference is what we call black or illegally generated income by politicians and parties," says Prof Arun Kumar of Jawaharlal Nehru University, who has written extensively on the black economy and authored a book on the subject. "To the extent that TV sets are given away and saris are bought for prospective women voters, we could see (the bribes) as a redistribution of that illegal wealth," he says.With that much money floating in the system, it wouldn't be misplaced to see larger benefits, or at least some cost-savings, for the voting public.
Unfortunately, the benefits of these bribes are too thinly spread out—not targeted at all, say economists—and ultimately, the sums are negligible compared with the size of the economy. They will not create any "stimulus" at all, avers Kumar. At Rs 10,000 crore, the electoral spending is about 0.2 per cent of the country's Rs 50 lakh crore GDP. "Hardly anything, it's basically a waste," he says. Happily, at least some proportion of the Rs 10,000-16,000 crore will go into purchasing and running services—the printers, transporters, counters, election watchers, messengers, guards, billboard painters—that will actually be useful for running the election itself.
Read the full article here.
Google empowering India!
India's 15th general election: tools for citizen empowerment
At Google, we believe information is fundamentally empowering. While all of our technologies demonstrate a commitment to this guiding principle, information is especially important when a society comes together to participate in democratic elections. Beginning ten days from today, more than 700 million eligible voters in India will over the course of four weeks have the opportunity to participate in the largest democratic event in human history — India's 15th general election.
Today, along with a wide range of partners, we are happy to announce the launch of the Google India Elections Centre - available in English and in Hindi. People from across India can use the centre to do the following:
- Confirm their voter registration status
- Discover their polling location
- View their constituency on a map
- Consume relevant election-related news, blogs, videos, and quotations
- Evaluate the status of development in their constituency across a range of indicators
- Learn about the background of their Member of Parliament and this year's candidates
With still more features to be added during the election, we hope the site will be an ongoing resource for analysis, governance, and democracy in India after the election.
This project would not have been possible without the shared vision of a broad coalition of partners: the Association for Democratic Reforms, HT Media Limited, Indicus Analytics, the Janaagraha Centre for Citizenship and Democracy, the Liberty Institute, and PRS Legislative Services. These groups are the true champions of promoting a more transparent democracy, and we're privileged to be able to shine a light on their work on the occasion of India's 15th Lok Sabha polls. We're hopeful not only that the elections centre will further a culture that seeks access to information, but that it will also yield positive changes in voting patterns during the upcoming polls. Please visit the site, select your constituency, and get started! Spread the word about what you learn and, of course, don't forget to visit the polls.
Read the original blog here.
Tuesday, March 31, 2009
Rich MPs, poor people
Another election season is upon us. It’s a good idea to focus on more basic questions: Do political representatives make any difference, to the state they’re from, or to the castes they represent; how representative are our MLAs/MPs; does only money-power matter? Do representatives from poorer states tend to be relatively wealthier in comparison to their population, than those from richer states? Does being rich ensure electoral success or is it tied to the performance of the party? Using data from Empowering India initiative, Sunil Jain seeks some answers in his column in Business Standard.
Now that election season is upon us, we’ll be bombarded by all manner of analyses, pre-election surveys on voting behaviour, post-election analyses on whether people voted their caste or just cast their vote; and so on. Till then, it’s a good idea to focus on more basic questions: Do political representatives make any difference, to the state they’re from, or to the castes they represent (are OBCs in Bihar any better off after 15 years of Lalu-raj?); indeed, are our MLAs/MPs even representative in the true sense of the term; does only money-power matter?
As for whether our MPs/MLAs are representative of us, the answer is mostly a ‘no’. By and large, the poorer the state, the richer the MP/MLA. One way of rationalising this is to say that political leaders have always belonged to the aristocracy — one look at the education levels of our MPs/MLAs, however, makes it clear this is not the case here. That this should happen, though, is no surprise — the poorer a state, the higher the chances of it being badly governed, and so the greater the scope/need for MPs/MLAs to have the power to dispense favours. Visit the Liberty Institute’s website (http://www.empoweringindia.org/new/home.aspx) if you want a lot more data, to construct and run econometric models especially.
- Maharashtra has amongst the highest per capita incomes in India (if you leave out small states like Delhi) and, on average, its MPs declared assets of around Rs 110 lakh in the 2004 Lok Sabha elections, ranging from Rs 64 lakh for the Shiv Sena to Rs 191 lakh for the Congress Party (Rs 65 lakh for Shiv Sena MLAs to Rs 133 lakh for Congress MLAs). Surprisingly, however, Andhra Pradesh, which has a 30 per cent lower per capita income, has MPs whose average assets are around 4.5 times as high at Rs 490 lakh (TDP MLAs in Andhra had an average asset-base of Rs 190 lakh and the figure was Rs 116 lakh for Congress MLAs); Punjab MPs are the richest (its per capita income is around a tenth lower but its MPs are around six times as wealthy with average assets of Rs 672 lakh).
- Gujarat MPs/MLAs are the paragon of virtue when it comes to their wealth (the state’s per capita is around 8 per cent lower than Maharashtra and its MPs have assets which are around 40 per cent lower). Poorer states like Bihar, Uttar Pradesh (UP) and Madhya Pradesh are the real shocker. Bihar’s per capita income is a fifth that of Maharashtra, yet its MPs are just a tenth less wealthy (Rs 101 lakh for Bihar versus Rs 110 lakh for Maharashtra) — Bihar MLAs, however, have assets that average around Rs 20 lakh as compared to three-four times that for Maharashtra MLAs. UP, similarly, has a per capita income that’s a little over a third that of Maharashtra, but its MPs are a third wealthier. Madhya Pradesh has a per capita income that’s 40 per cent that of Maharashtra, but its MPs are just 14 per cent less wealthy.
Read the full story here:
Indefenceofliberty
Business Standard
Lets go out and vote: It will make a difference
I believe, going out and voting for someone, anyone, is much better option, than just saying No. Even if our candidate gets less than 1% of vote, political parties will begin to look at us as a potential support base, and therefore more amenable to listen to us. If our preferred candidate secures 2-3% of the votes, he may be taken seriously, since he might be in a position to make or break the winner. If our preferred candidate secures 5% of the vote, other parties will sit up and take notice, and begin to woo us, and our candidate. And if we put up a candidate whom we believe in, and try to campaign to widen the social-political support base, and secure 10% of the votes, established parties will seriously seek us to join a coalition or an alliance, even when our candidate loses. And if we succeed in expanding further to 15% of the total voters, we will have a realistic chance of seeing our candidate win a multi-cornered contest. The advantages of going out and vote are much more real in today's political context, than we may actually think. With increasingly competitive political conditions, every vote single vote really counts, it will be taken note of by all the political contenders, quite irrespective of whether our own preferred candidate wins or loses.
* percentage of votes mentioned are out of the total registered voters in a constituency. If we assume a 50% turnout, then above numbers will seem to be even more realistic. A 15% of total voters will mean 30% of the votes cast, when the turn out is 50%.
~ Barun Mitra
Thursday, March 26, 2009
Civil Society Initiatives
Gone are the days when democracy and politics was only restricted to those chasing power, whose sole aim was to carry on the dirty business of robbing this country and its citizens. Awareness has spread like wild-fire. Somewhere the Mumbai terror attacks have produced passionate citizens who have come forward ‘to do something’. And this ‘something’ has finally left the confines of the thought or the living room conversations. This ‘something’ will pave the way for the change we all wait for.
Here is a list of a few of the growing number of citizens initiatives across the country whose objective is to encourage greater participation in the democratic process in various forms. With the tool of information technology and internet has greatly enriched and enhanced the range and scope of these initiatives.
Tuesday, March 24, 2009
Say NO to the “None of the above” idea
In the aftermath of the terrorist strike in Mumbai on 26/11/2008, many people expressed their anger and frustration at the political leadership. An idea that has gained new currency has been the decade-old proposal to introduce a negative option in the ballot – “None of the Above”, or simply the ‘No Vote’, to express our lack of confidence in politicians as such. Even the Supreme Court has called for a larger bench to decide on a recent PIL filed by the PUCL, asking for the introduction of the ‘No Vote’ in the ballot. The Election Commission of India has endorsed the idea too.
But the road to hell is often paved with good intentions. Thus, while sharing the sentiments of those who feel disfranchised and frustrated by politics as usual, I propose that we say NO to the idea of the ‘No Vote’. This is an idea that is not only undemocratic, but is actually anti-democratic in principle. It is based on a gross misunderstanding of our democratic institutions and electoral politics. Finally, the implications of the ‘No Vote’ have hardly been thought through.
I don’t look at democracy as a system where the majority rules. Rather, democracy is a system where minority views need to be protected so that they have the opportunity and freedom to persuade people and peacefully win others to their side, so that today’s minority view point has the potential to become the dominant opinion of tomorrow.
Let us extend the argument further. What would be the implications of such a ‘No Vote’ against the candidates contesting in the election in a constituency? Firstly, should the election be cancelled if the ‘No’ wins more vote than the candidates on the ballot? Or should re-polling be ordered only if 51% or more of the voters express lack of confidence in the existing slate of candidates? Suppose a fresh vote is ordered, should the previous set of candidates be allowed to stand again? In case the ‘No Vote’ turns out to be the dominant sentiment of the citizens in a constituency or a country, who would actually bear the responsibility for governance? Should the existing set of politicians just continue in office till the political deadlock over ‘No Vote’ is broken? Or should an un-elected bureaucracy or nominated technocracy be asked to take over the reins of political power?
We the intelligentsia, may not have the capacity to win the confidence of our fellow citizens, and win at the ballot. But that is no reason for us to try and delegitimise representative democracy, or worse, seek to depoliticize political democracy.
Read the full article here.
But the road to hell is often paved with good intentions. Thus, while sharing the sentiments of those who feel disfranchised and frustrated by politics as usual, I propose that we say NO to the idea of the ‘No Vote’. This is an idea that is not only undemocratic, but is actually anti-democratic in principle. It is based on a gross misunderstanding of our democratic institutions and electoral politics. Finally, the implications of the ‘No Vote’ have hardly been thought through.
I don’t look at democracy as a system where the majority rules. Rather, democracy is a system where minority views need to be protected so that they have the opportunity and freedom to persuade people and peacefully win others to their side, so that today’s minority view point has the potential to become the dominant opinion of tomorrow.
Let us extend the argument further. What would be the implications of such a ‘No Vote’ against the candidates contesting in the election in a constituency? Firstly, should the election be cancelled if the ‘No’ wins more vote than the candidates on the ballot? Or should re-polling be ordered only if 51% or more of the voters express lack of confidence in the existing slate of candidates? Suppose a fresh vote is ordered, should the previous set of candidates be allowed to stand again? In case the ‘No Vote’ turns out to be the dominant sentiment of the citizens in a constituency or a country, who would actually bear the responsibility for governance? Should the existing set of politicians just continue in office till the political deadlock over ‘No Vote’ is broken? Or should an un-elected bureaucracy or nominated technocracy be asked to take over the reins of political power?
We the intelligentsia, may not have the capacity to win the confidence of our fellow citizens, and win at the ballot. But that is no reason for us to try and delegitimise representative democracy, or worse, seek to depoliticize political democracy.
Read the full article here.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
