Citizens' Charter Of Demands

Only a little more than an year ago there was a surge of hope among Indian electorate that led to reversal of the trend for cobbling together an alliance to gain access to power in the face of a fractured mandate.  Now that the euphoria has worn off, second thoughts are emerging.  There is a faint feeling of desperation at not having any more choices left to try them out.

The electorate has learnt that like branded medicines, the entire political class contains essentially the same molecules and just different labels.  The political parties resort to all kind of con men including babas and mullahs to prescribe their particular brand to the public.

Thus it is gradually becoming obvious to the public that changing their current prescription from one brand to another cannot remedy the situation.  New molecules need to be discovered / invented.  This calls for overhauling the system.

I feel that the following changes in the current system have become imperative.  And as they say, this list is minimal and indicative and not exhaustive.

1. Reduce the cost of electioneering by making use of modern cheap communication technologies compulsory and putting a ban on all rallies.  Set up free dedicated TV and Radio channels to be compulsorily carried by all DTH service providers.  These channels should divide their time between formats and parties equitably.  The formats could be moderated debate among representative parties on specific issues of public interest and speeches by party representatives.  It should also provide means for live interactions with the audiences.
2. The current trend in elections is to put forward the best face for the party.  This is like enticing customers on the basis of the packaging of your medicine (the contents of which remain no different from the others.)  Elections need to be fought on the basis of issues and not faces.  Further, issues must be framed in actionable and measurable terms and not platitudes.  Towards this end, the Election Commission must evolve a format for manifestos that ought to be adhered by all parties and should also publish score card of the incumbent government on all the issues on which performance targets were given by the party.  Voters ought to remember that "if you can't measure it you can't manage it."
3. The current expensive process of voting must be replaced by one where all voters are able to vote through their mobile phone from their home or workplace.  Current reality shows do this and there is no reason why it cannot be done for general elections.  Technology available today can provide more security than that provided by the current manual processes.
4. Except for elections to the Local Self Government where elected representatives are directly responsible for vital services touching day-to-day lives of citizens, there must not be any candidates fighting elections.  Election should be contested by parties on the basis of manifestos and parties should then depute representatives to legislative bodies on the basis of their vote share in the state / country.  Please click here for more details on this proposal.  This will do away with the 'first past the post' system and its glaring shortcomings.
5. If the above proposal is implemented the parties will have a total control in choice of representatives and will not be hampered by their 'capability to win.'  With 'capability to win' out of the electoral process, strong steps can be initiated to stop criminals and unqualified persons from infiltrating the system.  EC may constitute an 'Legislature Service Selection Board' for certification of suitable candidates.  Certification should be done on the basis of their character, integrity and knowledge of politics and economics.  Parties may depute candidates to legislatures only from this pool.
6. Clauses like 'Office of Profit' that restrain government servants and public sector employees from contesting elections (deputation to legislature in our suggested scheme,) should be removed.  Such persons may join the legislature and then return to their job after expiry of the term.
7. None of the a-to-z protection should be given to any elected representatives.  Exceptions may be made for Prime Minister and President only.  If elected representatives indulge in rabble rousing they should be ready to face the consequences.  They must not have any protection that is not available to the public at large.
8. Implement Lokpal for all from santri-to-mantri.  Remove all protections granted to the executive.
9. Implement police reforms.
10. Do away with the bureaucracy as designed by the British.  Redesign the government machinery for efficiency and service rather that lording it over the subjects.  Obviously, the redesign must not be done by the current government servants.  Engage a group of management consultancy firms to suggest the new organizational systems.

All these call for substantial modification of several acts including the Constitution.  Politicians who, naturally, will oppose all of the suggested measures have all the excuses for not doing it.  Excuses may range from lack of 2/3 majority to their sworn-in allegiance to the Constitution as it exists today!

How Do We Tame The Overlords?

Many of the issues agitating large groups in India can be traced to the absurdly plum pay and perquisites offered to government employees (GE) and the ridiculous levels of protection granted to them against non-performance and malpractices.  To make the picture complete you must also firmly keep in mind that GE do not view themselves as public servants but as overlords to whom the public must pay obeisances and who collect personal fees for every service that they are supposed to render as part of their duty.  IAS are an outstanding and dramatic sample of this rotten GE class.

This group (GEs) provoke two kinds of reaction amongst the non-GE public.  One is that of intense anger and the other an intense desire to become one of them.  The massive support that Anna received for his Jan Lokpal movement is a manifestation of the first reaction.  The current competitive backwardness (CB) for landing a government job is a manifestation of the second reaction: the current agitation in Gujarat brings out the gravity of the situation.

Another example of the second reaction is current agitation by army men.  Our defense veterans are very upset about the delay in One Rank One Pension (OROP.)  Another group to which I belong, namely, bankers, also wanted this.  They call it pension updation.  However I understand that this group has lowered its already weak voice after its treacherous leaders signed an agreement which lowered the pensions while granting a meager increase in salaries.

What is hurting these groups is that OROP has been granted to the mammoth non-performing and parasitic bureaucracy long back. (And if bureaucracy has it, I presume that politicians must be having it too.)  It hurts the pride of a soldier to think that a group of rotten pen-pushers and obstacle creators has it while it is denied to those who lay down their lives as part of their duty to the country!

Here are some suggestions that may partly remedy the situation:

1. A salary that is 20 times the current poverty line should be the ceiling for salaries paid to government servants at any level.
2. Salaries of PSUs should be decided on the basis of their capacity to pay and have no relation to those of government servants.
3. Government servants must compulsorily avail of government run services in every sector where it is available, the foremost being education and health.
4. If the budgetary deficit is not zero or below the agreed limit, no increases in staff expenses on any count should be admissible.
5. Top positions in each ministry must be filled only through lateral recruitment of those who have qualification and expertise in the area.  Such lateral recruits may be offered market based salaries to draw in the right talent.
6. Citizen's charter and Lokpal must be set up immediately and have offices down to district level.
7. The need to obtain government permissions for prosecuting government servants must be done away with.
8. Punishment for corruption as also inefficiency must be exemplary.

Additions and reactions to these suggestions are welcome.
_________________________________________________________________________________

हार्दिक शुभकामनाओं सहित:

सर्वोत्तम सरकारी नौकरी, हम को हो गया ज्ञान,
बन पिछड़ा हड़पो इसे, इसमें ही कल्याण.

ProModis and AntiModis (प्रोमोदी और अंतिमोदी)

Today's world is divided into two camps.  One belongs to ProModis and the other to AntiModis.  You are either for NaMo or against him.  There is a minuscule third group which is probably shunned by both.  Today I am camping in this Neither For Nor Against Modi (NeFnAMo) group and writing this post from there.

Modi deserves credit for ridding this country of Congress which had turned moribund, arrogant and corrupt to the core.  He deserves credit for conclusively demonstrating that a person from the so called OBCs can indeed make a better leader than many from the so called upper castes.  This would not be the case had one of the other OBC leaders somehow made it to the top post.  He deserves credit for lifting the country from collective gloom and desperation.  He deserves credit for demonstrating that you need not be an English speaking elite to rise to the top.  He deserves credit for demonstrating to Indians that we can be assertive and decisive.  And I am sure that ProModis can make many additions to this list.

And yet let us not forget what agitated the collective Indian conscience most before the last parliamentary elections.  People felt thoroughly disgusted with the stubborn corruption, a rotten bureaucracy that is not only corrupt and devoid of all sensitivity but also heavily protected against any action.  People were fed up with rampant criminalization of politics.  They wanted changes in the electoral process so that high entry barriers were removed and the stranglehold of existing coterie of politicians broken.  They wanted changes in the Representation of People's Act to ensure that vile and undeserving candidates could not make it to the Parliament by garnering less than 20% of the votes.

Have things changed on any of these fronts?  Modi touched his forehead to the steps of the Parliament to show that it was at par with a temple.  People thought here is a person who wouldn't let this temple be desecrated by allowing tainted people inside.  The hopes have been belied.  Just look at the number of tainted ministers in his cabinet.  Has Modi even once spoken on the need to make changes in the Representation of Peoples Act to ensure that people facing criminal charges are not allowed to contest election.  And I would like to add this - to hell with the argument that even innocent people well get debarred as clever opponents trap them into false charges.  I hate saying so but Rajiv Gandhi performed better on this front when he tore up the bill defending parliamentarians facing criminal charges.

It cannot be gainsaid that Modi with all the extravaganza of his poll campaign has raised the entry barriers to politics to an all time high.  He is not even talking of electoral reforms.

Bureaucracy in this country is worse than Kafkaesque.  They have literally covered the administrative landscape with shit.  Modi does not have a word of caution for them; only praises!  He would rather have the suffering public clean the shit.  Modi is absolutely silent on the issue of LokPal.  Was it not one of the burning issues when the election was fought.  Again I hate to say this but Congress was more responsive to public sentiments when they got the LokPal bill passed.

Modi kept silent on the issue of black money and spoke up only he sensed the public outrage welling up again.  He is now making appropriate noises but his sincerity is no more beyond doubt.

Did anyone of us expect a government under Modi to play games that the Yadav regime plays in UP?  We are talking of providing Z security and other paraphernalia that make its recipient a VIP.  Why does Ramdeo require Z security?  Doesn't he have more than adequate resources to arrange his own security?

Was Modi being sincere when he bowed down to a protest by a handful of students in UP for excluding English from civil services examination?  He almost reopened the Pandora's box of lingual conflicts that were thought to be a thing of the past.  Is it okay to weaken institutions and the framework of good rules to bring in an officer of his choice?  Shouldn't judiciary's voice be heard when making changes to a system of selection of judges?  Does this not remind one of how Indira Gandhi weakened the institutional framework of the country?

All the issues that agitated the collective mind of Indian people immediately before elections have been cold shouldered.  And yet Modi persists in his efforts to generate euphoria by making grand appearances before NRI crowds abroad.

Inflation continues to rage.  If fuel prices have come down it is only fortuitous and not the result of any conscious efforts by the government.  One doubts whether data is being manipulated to show a lower inflation.  We are all aware of how a regulatory body in Delhi recently admitted to calculation mistake (read manipulation) in recommending higher electricity prices.

I will stop here lest the post becomes too long to read.

I am already feeling a little disappointed.  AntiModis may be feeling more so.

Has our democracy turned into an oligarchy?

Our current political class has realized that they rule the country together.  The division into ruling party, coalition members, outside supporters, and opposition is just a matter of detail and share in the exploits of power. 

With this tacit understanding their focus is on keeping entry barriers high so the group can remain intact.  This is done by raising election expenditure to absurdly high levels and then spending even beyond these limits.  Why bother: It will be made good!

The other focus point is to ensure that no one is able to challenge them or throw them out for their licentious behavior befitting oligarchs.  And this is why they stand firmly together when it comes to institutions like Lokpal that can do so.  It is indeed surprising in the utmost that this glaringly plain truth is not appreciated by public at large.

Such blindness is fostered amongst electorate by covering their eyes with blindfolds of religion, region, caste, class and what have you.

Throw away these blindfolds before you lose vision altogether.  See things for what they are and change them if you can.

I do not support Kejariwal .......

Many derogatory findings about Kejariwal are surfacing on the net.  Without going into the question of truth let me say that there is no person on earth who can call himself an angel.  We need checks and balances only because weaknesses are so human.

And thus I say that I do not support Kejariwal - the man - but his demand for creating a credible and vibrant bulwark against rampant corruption.  In fact I will support the most detestable person in the country if he stood fully and truly committed to the idea.

The extent to which the political class is opposed to the idea (don't let their pronouncements fool you) is evident from the fact that today it is possible for Modi to turn the current wave in his favor into a hurricane by declaring his support for a strong Lokpal, but he won't do it.  It was possible for Congress to redeem itself by supporting a credible Lokpal, but they opted for a Jokepal instead.  Why, for God's sake, why?

Then there are some amongst us who say let Modi come first, Lokpal can come next.  Absolutely wrong!  Let Lokpal come first and then a strong leader like Modi can do a lot of good.  If Modi comes first, credible Lokpal will never come.  And without checks and balances strong headed leaders like Modi may do more damage than good.

So I do not support Kejariwal but I would support ANYONE who can give this country a credible Lokpal and save us from ourselves.

Why do I support Kejariwal?

A question has been asked as to why do I support Kejariwal.  Kejariwal does not have the gift of the gab, he cannot make a good repartee, can make tactical mistakes and also does not speak English fluently.  The reason is pretty simple.  Human beings can exist only in societies and societies need infrastructure to exist.  And all that we value as wealth is possible only through this group existence.  Individually and without collaboration it would be impossible to generate the kind of wealth that organized societies generate.  Towards this end, the physical infrastructure, of course, is important.  But even more important is the infrastructure of ideas and practices that decide the interpersonal relationships and sharing of the fruits of such collaborative living. In fact, it is this infrastructure that also decides the kinds of fruits that the collaborative existence would like to generate.

Many of the things that we see as a vice today were programmed into us by nature as means to survival.  Greed, anger, lust all fall under this category of survival tools that are not really needed today, not with the intensity that is hardwired into us.  Take the example of the hardwired liking for fat and sugar in the human race.  It was a tool for survival when the chances of having to go without food were pretty high.  But today we have to consciously and deliberately fight off this craving.  Those who do not do so turn obese and sick and become non-productive and a burden on the society.

Because of such ingrained greed, given the opportunity and a large enough temptation any human being is likely to succumb to take away more than his fare share.  It seems to me that apart from this ingrained greed, we also have a squirrel programmed inside us.  This squirrel wants to take all the fruits not merely to indulge its hunger but also to salt it away so others cannot reach it even if they are starving.  As the productivity of the society increases so does the size of the common wealth and it tempts many who devise devious means to start squirreling it away.  It is a sick behavior like that of an obese person who likes to stuff himself with all the food that he does not need and also wants his refrigerator to be overflowing all the time.  But then as we said it is all very human.  And we have to have means to fight off this natural tendency.

The point I am trying to make is that the infrastructure that a society needs to build before it builds any other is one that can check this greed that is bad for the society and also for the greedy individual.  It was just NOT possible to do so in a monarchy or an oligarchy.  But it is definitely possible to do so in a democracy and it must be done as the very first thing.  Our squirrels in the form of clever politicians have realized that if somehow they can thwart this infrastructure, they can enjoy undue power and wealth as in an oligarchy or monarchy while shouting from the rooftops that it is a democracy!  And they have successfully thwarted it for over six decades.

And hence if a politician says that his first priority is to build this infrastructure and that everything else can wait, he makes the most sense and must be supported at ALL COSTS.  For the cost of not doing so is humongous, terrible, horrendous and excruciating.  We have already tasted the fruits of being without this infrastructure.

Kejariwal is just an ordinary man and probably a below-average politician.  In fact there are only ordinary men on this planet and those who claim to be otherwise are either conceited or cheats. Some may have stronger brains and some may be more brawny, but they can take advantage of this endowment only because they are enabled by the society. Kejariwal matters not because of any great traits or personal qualities but because of his contribution in bringing about awareness of the costs of not building this foremost infrastructure and his stated position to give it priority above everything else.

All other parties and leaders including BJP and Modi, notwithstanding what they say, are committed to thwarting this infrastructure for as long as they can.  Make no mistakes on this count.  

If AAP were not there, I might vote for Modi.  But if AAP is there, all right thinking people must vote for it.

The institution of Lokpal is not against enterprise, entrepreneurship or markets.  It is against abuse of power by big bad squirrels amongst us. And it must be created and created right before doing anything else.

Ragging Kejariwal - India Today Conclave

Just finished watching a program on Aaj-Tak where Kejariwal was grilled by an audience consisting of journos and industrialists.  I don't know for sure but it must be the conclave for which he was flown to Delhi by India Today group.  I joined the program midway where a journalist was reading out a piece of bad poetry ridiculing Kejariwal's dress sense and his persistent cough and calling him a fugitive who ran away from private sector to public sector to politics and then away from power.  It was pathetic, outrageous, disgusting and clearly the act of a person whose motive was not journalism but some ulterior one.

Kejariwal did not respond and it must have given a lot of satisfaction to this man who was an epitome of people living off the fat of this country and holding the common man in contempt and having no qualms about snubbing him.  Kejariwal could have given an equally acerbic response but did not do so.  And he has won my heart by doing so.  It shows that he is not yet a typical politician who has a witty response ready for all criticism, imagined or genuine.  It shows that he has not yet imbibed the art of snobbery that helps one distance himself from Aam Aadmi and remains as vulnerable as an Aam-Aadmi.  It shows that he is a really simple minded person who is vulnerable to such unethical and unscrupulous barbs from unethical sharp shooters.  It shows that he is a person who is constantly focused on his purpose and not busy inventing clever cliches and responses.  Kejariwal, I stand with you more firmly than ever.

Coming to this sharp shooter's comments, here are my observations.  Nothing could be in worse taste than ridiculing a person for dressing like a common man.  And one who calls Kejariwal a fugitive must be someone whose upbringing tells him to stick to exploits of power at all costs and come what may.  Must be a person who would lick the feet of those who can do him a favor and kick at those who are either not in a position to do so or would not do so.  I wonder if he would have the guts to read out such sickening poetry to a RaGa or a NaMo or a Sonia or a Mulayam or a Lalu et al.

Can we not understand the simple fact that providing sops was not AAPs goal even though they have done so for the simple tactical reason that those who stood for change do not get weaned and swept away by the pied pipers of the establishment.  Their goal can ONLY be achieved by creating the anti-corruption infrastructure in the form of a credible Lokpal and NO OTHER MEANS.  And hence the decision to quit after this move was defeated was the ONLY CORRECT RESPONSE.  In fact if AAP had decided to stick to power that would be suspicious indeed.

As regards his constant movement and not sticking to anything including power, a sane person would see it as the sign of a vibrant intellect that is constant alive to its environment and committed to his purpose.  Sticking to a plum position in government like a corrupt-to-the-bone rishwatkhor, or to a post (खूंटा) like a buffalo or a seat of power like one of our sickening leaders is becoming of only a decadent, corrupt and obnoxious person and not a visionary or a revolutionary like Kejariwal.  Movement alone is the sign of life.

Journalists would do well to expel the person who read out this poetry from their profession.

Oppressors, Oppressed and an Absurd Saying.

There is a saying that those who put up with oppression are just as guilty as those who oppress them.  I find this truly diabolical.  This is the the equivalent of saying that if an enraged elephant crushes a tiny animal, the crushed animal is just as guilty as the elephant!!  Oppressors are always in a position of power.  On the other other hand the oppressed are helpless and have little option but to silently suffer at the hand of the oppressors.

The absurdity of the saying must have been obvious to everyone include the originator.  And it can be said with near certainty that the saying must have come from an oppressor.  It is so because declaring an oppressed man as guilty is the ultimate act of oppression indeed.  This is embodied in another saying in Hindi which goes like this - जबरा मारे भी और रोने भी ना दे!  This roughly translates to this - A heavy-handed person not only beats you up but also yells at you not to cry.

What probably was originally meant by the saying mentioned at the beginning was this - An oppressed person who stands up to an oppressor is far braver than him indeed.  But then some clever person turned it on its head and propagated the current version.  All right thinking people must boycott this diabolical saying in its current form.

What brought this saying to my mind is the current law that holds a bribe giver too as guilty and a clause in the LokPal Act that says that a complainant who is not able to prove the charges is liable to be punished with imprisonment.  So you are damned if you put up with demands of the corrupt - that is the saying (and also the law), isn't it? - and double-damned if you resist it and fail.  And the way system is rigged, you are more likely to fail than not. The question surfaces again - can perpetrator of a crime and its victim be treated alike?

Similarly, equality before law, though a noble concept, is definitely unattainable for the simple reason that those in power can always manipulate things to fool the law which is constrained to go by available evidences alone.  Thus for true equality there ought to be a much harsher and speedier law for those in power and all punishments awarded to them must be exemplary.  Will the supreme and powerful legislative bodies ever agree to this?

Ill defined processes and corruption at the grassroots level.

Many theories have been advanced to explain higher levels of corruption in our society, especially that at the lower levels of hierarchy, as compared to certain developed western countries.  One theory attributes lower levels of corruption in the west to their individualistic tendencies while an individual in India is defined only in terms of his family, community and society.  Another theory attributes corruption in our society to our firm belief in placating planets and gods and, by extension, all authority figures through offerings.  There are other theories too.  I would like to add one more theory to this collection.  I have constructed this theory on the basis of my observations during a few brief visits to USA.

I have noticed during my visits that operating procedures are very highly standardized and are modeled as an assembly line.  You notice this in fast food joints, retail stores, government offices and everywhere.  As a friend put it, USA is an SOP (Standard Operating Procedure) driven country.  I am sure that the standard procedures are defined at the very top level where people have a complete view of the business and apply careful thought to processes.  As against this each operative at the customer contact point has a rigorously defined process to execute.  They are so focused on their process that they neither have the time nor the inclination to go or learn beyond it.  Even the language for interaction with the customer is standardized and any deviation from it often leads to confusion.  This ensures efficient delivery of services and eliminates any discrimination.

I feel that the situation is very different here in India.  Of course we are excepting the organizations that are an offshoot from the west or have deliberately modeled themselves on that pattern.  In our country the top only defines things in broad terms, if at all, and seldom takes the trouble of structuring the processes and procedures in complete detail and this is left to the people at the lower level who actually deliver the service.  I used to work in a bank and had the opportunity to see the manual operations being computerized.  There was frequent bewilderment while defining the standard procedures for implementation in the software because several branches and regions were found to be following a different procedure of their own.  I have seen most formats received from RBI or the government at the head office level for certain data being passed on to the branches exactly as they were received.  Nobody bothered to consider why should a format to be filled out by a single branch have rows for district-wise and state-wise totals.  As the government bureaucracy was the role model for Public Sector banks, I presume things must be the same in the government offices too.

The result is that while the top is busy with unabashed exercise and enjoyment of power, people at the lowest levels evolve all the detailed processes.  Their motive is seldom to provide the very best service to the customer.  Things are often kept vague to enable staff to evade responsibility and to browbeat the customer into submission to their demands.  The system is designed, rather misdesigned by them and they know it too well to twist and bend it as they like.  So if you are from the VIP class and have the contacts to get me chastised, your job gets done in a jiffy using embedded alternate shortcuts.  If you are not, God help you.  I do wonder if it is the lack of discrimination between VIPs and non-VIPs that offends the sensibilities of our VIPs when they travel abroad to more egalitarian and process-driven parts of the world.

The insistence by Kejariwal and his party for having well defined Citizens' Charter and ruthlessly implementing it is only an attempt at straightening out the garbled up processes in government offices.

This is also the reason that IT-enabling the bureaucratic processes is seen as one way of curbing corruption.  IT-enabling forces you to define your processes clearly and also provides efficient tools for monitoring (by a Lokpal!?)