The contributors of this blog would like to discuss 'Multi-party system and competitive politics in India.' in the different sections .
The dawn of Indian Political history was with Multi-Party system . Every sphere of life undergoes certain changes .So did politics.We would try to answer a set of questions and in the process discuss Multi-Party System and Competitive Politics in India
* The Political organizations,institutions, systems and ideologies in our country and their
evolution over a period of time.
*How Indian Politics is more fascinating in today's world due to the wide variety of
issues that influence our politics , be caste , religion , nepotism , dynastic politics ,
reservations ?? etc..
*How suitable is multi party system to India ? ( different people , geographical areas ,
cultures ... all need representation .. )
*whether multi- party system is detrimental to development or favorable ? how ?
*How and why did the caste system and religion infiltrate the political system and its
effects?
*With a special emphasis on coalition governments ..
SECTION - 1 Rachana.Ch,Hs13h028
Our country, India, is the world's largest democracy by electorate.Consisting of 29 states and seven centrally administered union territories, India has the longest written constitution in the world.
Politics in India takes place in accordance
with the constitution. India is a federal parliamentary democratic republic country. India
has a multi-party system, where there are a number of national as well as
regional political parties. Role of any Political Party in democracy like India
would be to represent the various sections among the society (here, the Indian
Society) and their core values play a major role in the politics of India.
As of today, the country has seven main national
parties: the Indian National Congress (INC), Bhartiya Janta Party (BJP),
Communist Party of India (CPI) and the Communist Party of India (Marxist)
(CPI(M)), Aam Aadmi Party (AAP), Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP) and the Nationalist
Congress Party (NCP).
On the national scale, there are three alliances (coalitions) in our
country, competing with each other to form the Government at the centre. The
member parties come together and work in peace and harmony for the national
interests. It is allowed for these parties to jump across the alliances
whenever it considers to be deemed fit. The three alliances are :
(1)NDA National Democratic
Alliance It is a centre –right coalition led
by BJP
(2)UPA United Progressive
Alliance It is a
centre-left coalition led by Congress
(3)Third front The parties which do not belong to any of the above coalitions due to
certain issues form the third front. One of the major parties in this alliance
is CPI(M). The alliance has no official leading party.
Since we received independence in 1947 (66 years),
our country has been ruled by the Indian National Congress (INC) for
53 years and most of the remaining years by the BJP coalition. And it is still
being continued in the same way either the NDA or the UPA ( the third front not
receiving majority and hence becoming the ‘non-active’ party at the centre).
This makes me wonder if the party system of our country is bi-party or
multi-party!! Because would not any major political power try and see that it's decision prevails among all other smaller coalition parties
A striking feature of certain major Indian
political parties that always keeps national and international political
observers in awe is that, except the communist parties, most of the other
political parties of India lack an proper ideological basis, which, actually should
have been one of the very important factors that leads to the establishment of
a political party. The heterogeneous Indian population results in the division between
different sections of the people based on religion, region, language, caste and race makes it easy for the politicians to get what they exactly want. When I say politicians lack proper ideological basis , I mean there are always new ideas and a different outlook that they can come up with instead of their age-old perceptions or even along with those convictions , new beliefs and thoughts should always have place in any political party.
Some of the parties are openly profess their focus on the interests of a
particular group; like, the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam's
(DMK) and the All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam's (AIADMK) in Tamil Nadu whose focus lies on the Dravidian population, and the Shiv Sena's pro-Marathi agenda
in Maharashtra.There are few other parties that claim to be universal in nature, but
tend to draw support from particular sections of the population. Eg: the Rashtriya Janata Dal has its vote bank with the Yadav and Muslim population
of Bihar and the All
India Trinamool Congress does not have any
significant support outside West Bengal.
There is always a chance that the narrow focus and vote bank politics of some parties, even in the central government and central legislature, side
lines national issues such as economic welfare and national security, when each party wants its different agendas to be addressed. Moreover,
internal security is also threatened as incidences of political parties
instigating and leading violence between two opposing groups of people is a frequent
occurrence. (communal riots)
Poverty, unemployment and development are the essential economic issues that influence
politics.To address these issues, each party in power tried to deal with
them in both direct and indirect approaches.Terrorism, Naxalism, religious
or communal violence and caste-related
violence are other important issues that affect
the political environment of the Indian nation. Stringent anti-terror
legislation have received much political attention, both in favour and
opposed.
Like Religion and caste ,Terrorism and Naxalism had also affected Indian
politics since their conception. Communal riots have always been there too ; regardless of who is ruling
in the centre and state , incited mostly for the political gains of certain
sections of the people. Action against organised crime and other law and order
issues which do not affect the outcomes of elections also go hand in hand with
Indian politics. At the same time, we also have an issue of criminal–politician
nexus.
Many elected legislators have criminal cases against them. In July 2008,
the Washington
Post reported that nearly a fourth of the 540 Indian Parliament members faced criminal charges, "including human
trafficking, immigration rackets, embezzlement, rape and
even murder”- (Source: Wikipedia)
Reservations is one other critical aspect that should be taken into
consideration when factors that influence the people with respective politics
in our country. ‘Vote Bank politics’ is the term phrased in this regard; which
is turning out to be a perfect enemy of Indian democracy. Minority Religion and
caste reservations are being used as a ‘tool’ to attract people towards
parties. There has been an unrelenting effort from their side to include it
wherever possible in there manifestos. While there is a section that seconds
this, there is another section which opines that the majority is being neglected! (and this ..cannot be
neglected too ! )
There is this notion of ‘the leader’ in the political parties of our
country, the leader being the focal point of the party ; the party and its work
is moves around these leaders. These individuals (leaders) actively play a
dominant role. Their leadership can again be neatly transferred to the members
they are concerned with and tends to take dynastic route. This happens in both
national and regional parties. A very evident example at the centre would be
the Indian National Congress(INC) that has been led by Nehru-Gandhi dynasty
since independence, starting from Jawaharlal Nehru …to Indira Gandhi
, Rajiv Gandhi and now we have Sonia Gandhi and her son Rahul Gandhi in
prominent positions in the INC.As a result of such dominance, the leaders of
political parties of the country tend to take an autocratic tone. In the case of the state politics , we have Mulayam Singh Yadav - Akhilesh Yadav (Uttar Pradesh), Chandra Babu Naidu - Lokesh (Andhra Pradesh ), K.Chandra Sekhar Rao -K.Tarakarama Rao , Kavitha )
The political parties in our country and the party system during the
current times have become coalitional rather than consensual, segmental rather
than holistic, pragmatic rather than ideological according to Prakash Sarangi
(professor of Political Science at the University of Hyderabad). These changes
could be interlinked with the transformations in the Indian Society. The
Socio-Economic, Politico –Cultural and religious liberalisation of the nation
would and should by and large reconstruct Indian Society.
These modifications or variations need not always lead us to the looming
problems. The people have to perceive the changes in accordance to the shifts
in the historical occurrences. Political parties of the preceding eras could
not feasibly provide proper protected foundations for a fitting relationship
between self-governing individuals in society and the collective political
sphere of the state. Necessity for the new types of democratic institutional set
up which can act as mediators between the civil society and the state arose.
As Partha Chatterjee writes, "In the context of the latest phase of the globalisation of the capital, we may well be witnessing an emerging opposition between modernity and democracy,i.e.,between civil society and political society.
Section II Prashanth Harsha
If we take a look into the deeper aspects of the trending government - Coalition , this is what we need to know.
Coalition is something like integrating and moving together. Basically, the term coalition is derived from the Latin word “Societas” means to go or grow together. Thus, it means an act of Coalescing or uniting into one body or alliance. It indicates the combination of a number of bodies or parts into one body or whole. In the political sense it is used to indicate an alliance or temporary union between various political groups for the exercise or control of political power. Considering context of Social sciences we can define it as “Cooperative arrangements under which distinct political parties or at all events members of such parties unite to form a Government or Ministry”. Thus, it can be said that result of the exigencies of competitive multi-party system in a parliamentary democracy is Coalition. It is a phenomenon where more than two political parties come together to form a government, sinking their basic ideological differences in the event of the inability of any single party to command a workable majority in the lower House of the legislature.
Generally
coalitions are said to be formed on account of one of the following reasons:
1). No single political party is able to secure a working majority in the popular house on account of the presence of multi-party system. Under these circumstances a number like-minded political parties form the coalition to provide a workable majority and run the government.
2). In a Bi-party system a deadlock may be created due of even balance between two parties allying itself with a minor group such as neutral or defectors till the majority in its favor.
3). A coalition may be necessitated by a national crisis when the various political groups may suspend their political strife and collaborate in the general cause of protecting and promoting their national interest.
1). No single political party is able to secure a working majority in the popular house on account of the presence of multi-party system. Under these circumstances a number like-minded political parties form the coalition to provide a workable majority and run the government.
2). In a Bi-party system a deadlock may be created due of even balance between two parties allying itself with a minor group such as neutral or defectors till the majority in its favor.
3). A coalition may be necessitated by a national crisis when the various political groups may suspend their political strife and collaborate in the general cause of protecting and promoting their national interest.
Federalism And
Coalition Government In India:
The history of the Indian federalism can be traced back to the provisions enshrined in the Government of India Act, 1935. The Indian constitution fulfils the requirement of a federal system by prescribing the presence of two levels of governance simultaneously operating at (I) national, central and federal government; (ii) state, regional and provincial government along with the division of powers between Centre and state allocated by the constitution.
The history of the Indian federalism can be traced back to the provisions enshrined in the Government of India Act, 1935. The Indian constitution fulfils the requirement of a federal system by prescribing the presence of two levels of governance simultaneously operating at (I) national, central and federal government; (ii) state, regional and provincial government along with the division of powers between Centre and state allocated by the constitution.
Emergence of
coalition Government in India:
The process of fragmentation of the national party system and emergence of minority or coalition governments started in India from 1967. This period also marked the emergence of coalitions and also new parties and mergers along with breakup of some parties and absorption of the others.
This began the era of Coalition Politics or Multi party rule in India. The adoption of multi-party system and regionalism changed the Centre-state relations to a certain extent. Participation of many regional parties in the coalition government at the Centre particularly indicates the significant shift from centralized governance towards shared rule and federal governance.
Coalition Government And Its Impact On Centre State Relations:
With the increase in the regional parties’ participation the Indian government both at the Centre and state has led to various changes and impact on Centre- State relation.
The impact of the Coalition government on Centre- State relations can be discussed under the following headings in light of the recent political developments:
1. The office of the Governor;
2. The increase in the demand for State autonomy.
The process of fragmentation of the national party system and emergence of minority or coalition governments started in India from 1967. This period also marked the emergence of coalitions and also new parties and mergers along with breakup of some parties and absorption of the others.
This began the era of Coalition Politics or Multi party rule in India. The adoption of multi-party system and regionalism changed the Centre-state relations to a certain extent. Participation of many regional parties in the coalition government at the Centre particularly indicates the significant shift from centralized governance towards shared rule and federal governance.
Coalition Government And Its Impact On Centre State Relations:
With the increase in the regional parties’ participation the Indian government both at the Centre and state has led to various changes and impact on Centre- State relation.
The impact of the Coalition government on Centre- State relations can be discussed under the following headings in light of the recent political developments:
1. The office of the Governor;
2. The increase in the demand for State autonomy.
Coalition
Government in India from 1977 to 2014:
At
the national level India's first ever coalition government was formed
under the Prime Minister ship of Morarji Desai which existed from 24
March 1977 to 15 July 1979 headed by the Janata Party. The first
successful coalition government in India which completed the whole 5 year term
was the BJP (Bharatiya Janata Party ) led National Democratic
Alliance(NDA) with Atal Bihari Vajpayee as Prime Minister from
1999-2004. Then another coalition, the United Progressive Alliance,
consists of 13 separate parties ruled India for two terms from 2004-2014. Now
after the elections in May 2014, National Democratic Alliance again came into
power with Narendra Modi as Prime Minister. India has had coalition
governments at the Centre as well as in individual states since the last two
decades. Since India is a diverse country with different ethnic, linguistic and
religious communities, it also has diverse ideologies. Due to this, the benefit
that a coalition has is that it leads to more consensus based politics and
reflects the popular opinion of the electorate. The current UPA-Left
arrangement had been formed after parliamentary elections in 2004. Though they
have main adversaries in three states, this government was still a stable one
till Left withdrew support on matters of nuclear deal.
Advocates
of proportional representation suggest that a coalition government leads to
more consensus-based politics, as a government comprising differing parties
(often based on different ideologies) need to compromise about governmental
policy. Another stated advantage is that a coalition government better reflects
the popular opinion of the electorate within a country.
Those
who disapprove of coalition governments believe that such governments have a
tendency to be fractious and prone to disharmony, as their component parties
hold differing beliefs and thus may not always agree on policy. Sometimes the
results of an election mean that the coalitions which are mathematically most
probable are ideologically not feasible, For example in Flanders
or Northern Ireland. A second difficulty might be the ability of minor
parties to play "kingmaker" and, particularly in close elections,
gain far more power in exchange for their support than the size of their vote
would otherwise justify.
Criticism on
Coalition Government:
Coalition
governments have also been criticized for sustaining
a consensus on issues when disagreement and the consequent discussion
would be more fruitful. To forge a consensus, the leaders of ruling coalition
parties can agree to silence their disagreements on an issue to unify the
coalition against the opposition. The coalition partners, if they control the
parliamentary majority, can collude to make the parliamentary discussion on the
issue irrelevant by consistently disregarding the arguments of the opposition
and voting against the opposition's proposals — even if there is disagreement
within the ruling parties about the issue.
Powerful
parties can also act in an oligocratic way to form an alliance to
stifle the growth of emerging parties. Of course, such an event is rare in
coalition governments when compared to two-party systems, which typically
exist because of stifling of the growth of emerging parties, often through
discriminatory nomination rules regulations and plurality voting
systems, and so on.
A
single, more powerful party can shape the policies of the coalition
disproportionately. Smaller or less powerful parties can be intimidated to not
openly disagree. In order to maintain the coalition, they would have to vote
against their own party's platform in the parliament. If they do not, the party
has to leave the government and loses executive power.
Merits of Coalition
Government:
1)
Coalition governments try to address the regional disparity.
2)
Public opinion is wider thereby greater role in decision making.
3)
Decisions are made considering the majority of the people.
4)
Having principles of politics of consensus.
5)
Effective representation of electorate wishes.
6)
Policies are made after lots of brainstorming.
7)
More federalism is there.
Problems of
Coalition:
1)
Different coalition partners have different manifestos, which hamper the policy
2)
Ideological differences are there.
3)
Smaller parties try to capture more power without considering the rhythm of
nation development.
4)
There is an ambiguity in transparency.
5)
Coalition government is unstable in nature.
6)
Parties try to get better portfolios for their candidates without considering
qualification, character and criminal records, etc.
7)
Spectrum of ministers becomes wide which put pressure on government exchequer.
Future of
Coalition:
In
Indian politics, the coalition governments are rooted both at the center as
well as states levels. This is basically due to emergence of regional parties
and imbalance development at the regional, district and grass root levels.The
fact of the matter is that India has had coalition governments in the past and
it will continue to have in the future as well. Therefore, it is in best interest
for all that parties develop a sense of understanding and do not play games of
power politics and bad politics. It is high time that the MPs realize how bad
India fares on other economic variables in the world, and it is time they put
their energy in improving those than just catering to their selfish interests.
If
political parties feel that coalitions are too much of a compromise and always
lead to unstable governments, then India can think of alternative forms of government
the ; presidential system can be one but it has its own cons. It is very
important for the political parties to moderate their ideas as there are no ready-made
formulas or easy solutions to make coalitions work in a smooth manner.
SECTION -3 Shalem Rajulu
Emphasis on suitability of multi-party political system to India
Emphasis on suitability of multi-party political system to India
India is the world's largest democracy, stable and vibrant one too. In India the power lies in the hands of the common man and they decide who should rule them. This is in fact a state of maximum freedom.
A multi-party system sets into pace when there are people with different political ideologies. It is not fair to say that political ideologies should be restricted only to two. In a free democracy we can have any number of political ideologies and political parties. Whether they should be allowed to rule will be decided by the electorate.
A multi-party system gives more freedom of choice to the people thereby increasing their contribution towards governing the nation. With restrictions, we start to tilt towards ideologies like communism and dictatorship.
A multi-party system sets into pace when there are people with different political ideologies. It is not fair to say that political ideologies should be restricted only to two. In a free democracy we can have any number of political ideologies and political parties. Whether they should be allowed to rule will be decided by the electorate.
A multi-party system gives more freedom of choice to the people thereby increasing their contribution towards governing the nation. With restrictions, we start to tilt towards ideologies like communism and dictatorship.
We can present two examples which are mutually paradox to each other.
E.g.. It favors Multi-Party political Systems
If we have only the INC and the BJP (two party system) to rule India, what would the people who represent the Left ideology do? Who will they vote for, as they claim that the INC is capitalist and the BJP is communal?
Ideological differences in Economic issues like poverty, unemployment, development among 3 different national parties of India:
· Eradicate poverty through subsidies and aids is for Indian National Congress
· Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) encourages a free market economy.
· The Communist Party of India (Marxist) vehemently supports left-wing politics like land-for-all, right to work and strongly opposes neo-liberal policies such as globalization, capitalism and privatization.
Effective democracy is practiced only if there is enough choice for the voter to choose according to his wish rather than he himself forced to choose something due to lack of choice.
E.g.2.It opposes Multi-Party political Systems
Suppose 5 candidates stand for elections to represent constituency A with a 1000 registered voters but an actual population of 1200.
Even in the best election year, voter turnout rarely exceeds 80%. Thus 800 votes cast. Candidate L, M, N, O get 100 votes each and candidate P gets the other 400. Thus candidate P has not won the elections because a majority wants her there - she just received the largest number of votes (50% of votes cast). Thus if you are looking at real numbers, she only has 400 supporters out of a population of 1200.
In most Indian national elections, vote-share is barely 35-40% with the rest split over the other candidates. Account for registered votes and voter turnouts and you will see that "Democracy" in this case means having a large enough number to support you - even if this number is only a fourth of the population. And one-fourth of the population cannot claim to represent the entire people.
This is also the case with the UK system although the number of parties and candidates are lesser, thus increasing the vote-share.
Similarly if you look at any electoral system - the US Presidential is another case and point - it is clear that the battle of numbers determines who wins\loses. It isn't about a majority will or rule of the people.
It is about who can outshout the other.
In most Indian national elections, vote-share is barely 35-40% with the rest split over the other candidates. Account for registered votes and voter turnouts and you will see that "Democracy" in this case means having a large enough number to support you - even if this number is only a fourth of the population. And one-fourth of the population cannot claim to represent the entire people.
This is also the case with the UK system although the number of parties and candidates are lesser, thus increasing the vote-share.
Similarly if you look at any electoral system - the US Presidential is another case and point - it is clear that the battle of numbers determines who wins\loses. It isn't about a majority will or rule of the people.
It is about who can outshout the other.
If we consider the recent elections happened for European parliament through the pie-chart of seat share among political parties.
76% of the voters in the country didn’t believed that United Kingdom Independence party (UKIP) can deliver good governance and they voted against it (voted for another party).
But due to multi-party system, seats shared among 10 different national parties and as a single largest party in the parliament UKIP got the chance of forming government.
This will affect the faith of common man towards the democracy as his voice (vote) doesn’t make much difference.
We personally felt that democracy itself means choice and too many political parties cannot be detrimental to our growth. There is a problem in the way the government is formed, the way the leader is elected etc... but we need multiple voices in the society and that is what freedom of speech and expression stands for. So, a multi-party system is the best for India.
But some people are saying contradiction to this as, Multi-party system required consensus on many major issues facing the Country on National level. Principles and doctrines of political parties are diametrically opposite to each other and will never agree for consensus. Regional parties have their own agenda purely based on the region to which they belong and becomes the conflict of interest on India level. Moreover, regional parties are not matured enough to appreciate the intricacy of the problem faced by the country on global level. So one Party is better for India.
But at the end of the day it is values, efficiency, transparency, ethics, adaptability, accountability and transforming ability of political party that matters more than the system in which they are. If they govern according their constitution and aim for their citizens’ welfare even single party is enough for better governance.
Determining whether multi- party system is detrimental or favorable to development
A country's development is a combination of these factors:
1. Income levels
2. Freedom levels
3. Education levels
4. Infrastructure levels
5. Industrialization levels
As they indicate the socio-economical, educational and technological development of a nation
To achieve these factors existing political party should be
1. Stable and unbiased
2. Better representation of masses
3. Accounting interests of minorities
4. Avoid political instability due to fragile coalition
5. Get away from the influence of small and extreme parties
Merits of multi-party system for achieving these factors:
· Restricting choice to two parties limits the number of ideas on every issue and reduces each voter's choice. Each of the two parties has fixed views on various topics. A voter who supports the view of one party on a topic but supports the view of the other party on another topic is forced to compromise one of his views.
· A multi-party system, on the other hand, allows each citizen to vote for the party that best fits their beliefs and represents their ideology.
· Countries like the US and India are known for the diversity of their population. Two parties are not enough to represent this diversity
· A multi-party system is more responsive to a change or shift in public opinion. Two-party systems are not as flexible because they have a more or less rigid set of opinions on every issue.
· To win an election, each party in a two-party system is forced to moderate its views. Thus, each party represents the radically moderate, and not the conservative and liberal wings. As is evident in India, the multi-party system also caters to people with extreme views.
· If the voter turnout is very low, the votes that the winning party gets would actually only represent a minority of the population.
· Some voters tend to have one issue that determines which party they will vote for. In a two-party system, opposing parties tend to take opposite sides on many issues. These "one issue voters" will automatically vote for the party that represents their view on the one issue, even though they may disagree with most of their other positions.
· Since the two parties have completely opposing views on issues, they tend to reverse the policies of the previous government when voted into power. This does not benefit the state in the long run.
· A multi-party system prevents the leadership of a single party from setting policy without challenge.
· If any one party in a two-party system becomes weak, a dominant party system may develop.
· In a two-party system, candidates are motivated to run negative campaigns, pointing out the flaws in the "other person" (usually the leader of the other party).
Merits of two-party system
· The two-party system presents voters a simple choice.
· Since the parties in a two party system have to moderate radical views, they follow public opinion better than a multi-party system would.
· If the majority opinion is split among a large number of parties, it is possible that a party representing a minority view may prevail over the majority in a multi-party system. In this sense, the two-party system protects the majority from the minority.
· In a multi-party system, even parties with extremely radical views have a chance to be elected to power. This could result in chaotic and disastrous reforms. The moderate approach of a two-party system negates this possibility.
· There is no real control or limit over the number of parties. Sometimes, no single party is able to get a clear majority. This leads to hung parliaments and coalition politics, as has been the case in India for some time now.
· Coalition partners often tend to use their clout to get their way on key issues. This can be very detrimental to progress.
· There is very little chance of a coalition government in a two-party system. This provides for stable governance.
So we can neither establish the fact that multi- party system is detrimental nor favorable to development.It has its own pros and cons. It depends on the functionality and capability of government.However, there is always an alternative that can also be considered; here, that there is ample space for reorientation of party system in our country. Multi-party system definitely has its own benefits .. but so does bi-party system and as already discussed the present coalition governments is no less than a bi-part democracy. It is obviously an issue to be pondered about and would definitely be done by Political observers and analysts.
