OPinionatED Choosing People's Candidates By: Pramod Zacharias Herald - 17 March, 2009
Recently there has been a lot of focus on civil administration and the quality of our politicians who are elected to office to serve the general public. There has also been lots of space devoted to the failings of the educated populace in preventing the wrong kind of politicians being elected. This has been the burning issue in Goa ever since the days of the ill-fated Regional Plan and now seen nationally in the aftermath of the recent terror attacks in Mumbai and the public remonstrations of the Speaker of the Lok Sabha. However, it is important to note that last time in Goa, while there were numerous protests against the existing politicians (both ruling and in opposition), the voters finally elected the same crop again come election time, except for maybe a couple of defeats. The reasons given were the TINA (there is no other alternative) effect and that the educated voters are not casting their precious votes. If in such a small and highly literate state like Goa we cannot see significant changes, especially after a tide of democratic uprisings across villages and cities overturned anti-people policies so intensely supported by the politicians, then it is difficult to envisage it anywhere else in the country. Which brings us to the question: "Do the majority of electorate actually prefer the current system and its politicians?" The immediate reaction most likely is, "Definitely not". But then that does not explain the re-election of those who have been almost universally branded as villains. Why does the electorate persist with them rather than throwing them out. Is it as simple as buying votes? Or is it that a significant chunk of the electorate actually prefer this system that delivers on a case-to-case basis. Why are voters loyal? They could have simply taken the money and voted for someone else who is not a crook, or simply not voted at all. So then could it be that people would rather elect someone in whom they have the confidence to get their job done when they approach them for a particular requirement. Let me put it this way. Imagine an aam aadmi approaching any of the government offices or civic bodies for some requirement, be it for a building permission, or water connection or any such request. First you will simply be buried in the paperwork required, and rest assured that you will not be given the complete list of requirements in the first visit. Just to know what is required to be submitted will require multiple visits to the concerned office. Even if you are willing to pay a bribe you will still fall short in your quest to get the required permission, given the levels and various offices you have to push through. So if there is an option wherein you can simply go to the local politician and request him or her to "look into the matter" and sit back and see the files moving as if on roller skates, then which do you think any rational person would choose? Therefore it is my opinion that it is only a small percentage of the entire populace who are really concerned and unhappy at this situation, and since they are all partakers of the English media, it gets magnified beyond its actual size. The actual majority vote based upon issues and how they expect the candidates to solve them rather than on character. However it could be argued that the TINA factor has not been addressed. If there were better candidates committed to fair and effective governance, then possibly the voters would have given them a chance. For example there is an argument that in Goa the majority of the Catholic voters are not too comfortable voting for the BJP and therefore re-elect the existing representative even if they aren't too happy with his performance. But please bear in mind that the major political parties allocate tickets on 'electibility' and on how the common voter is expected to cast their votes. True, there have not been many candidates taking the independent route, possibly because of the lack of financial backing as also the expectation that voters prefer to vote for parties rather than candidates. However it is important to note that we are living with this supposed dissatisfaction with politicians for more than a decade, and market dynamics teach us that if there indeed was a market for strong individual candidates for so long, it would have definitely been snapped up by now. Yet some sections of the society and especially the media persist in trying to convince us that the majority of voters are awaiting better candidates. Everyone who believes that the current political system is inadequate, and wants to have their say in the candidate to be put up for elections, should take a part in nominating the 'people's candidate' We have 40 assembly seats in Goa, Let us try and find 40 names who are acceptable candidates for the voters of these 40 segments. It could be quite possible that the individual nominated will already be affiliated to a major political party. The major drawback and concern of the change agents, who would have otherwise entered politics, has been the lack of mass base. Now if we were to circulate a list of individuals whom we would like to see as rulers, be they academicians or professionals or doctors or musicians, and if the general voter indicated their preference for the same, then these candidates would be easier to convince to seek election. For example, let us have a list comprising Dr. Oscar Rebello, Patricia Pinto, Dean D'Cruz, Remo Fernandes and other well-known and committed individuals and circulate it among the voters and get their feedback. Let us invite the voters to recommend other names. If the numbers are significantly favouring any single candidates, then it should be impressed upon that individual to run for office. Goa, being almost 100% literate, should be a wonderful laboratory for this exercise. The exercise is difficult but not impossible. If all who speak (including business houses) are ready to act, then it shouldn't be too difficult to set up and fund an operation for just 40 seats. Everybody who is dissatisfied with the current situation should donate for this exercise. The imminent parliamentary elections provide us with a wonderful opportunity to test this theory. And I feel that a body like the Goa Bachao Andolan (GBA) can be a catalyst for this effort. All it requires is that there is desk manned by volunteers outside every polling station. Every voter who visits the voting booth is requested to suggest a name whom they would like to be seen elected from their assembly constituency. If required, a list of prominent and capable individuals may be put up for their reference, the whole exercise to be funded by individual or corporate or even institutional bodies. Once the names are collated and counted we should be able to arrive at a 'people's candidate' for most of the constituencies, if not all of them. COMMENTS: Pramod Zacharias needs to be congratulated for this forward looking article which makes a lot of sense in these times of 'free for all'. And it does not come to me as a surprise because only when maladies start taking the upper hand that appropriate remedies are sought for and pronto. Very recently, I have proposed that 'CITIZENS' [OF GOA] INITIATIVE should go in for selecting/choosing of people's candidates, if this is a must, which seems to be the only possible challenge to the corrupt political establishments, by forming new fronts (not political parties) such as GSPEF [Goa State Parliamentary Election Front] and GSAEF [Goa State Assembly Election Front]. The route to be taken for the identification and short-listing of possible candidates appears to be the same as what Mr. Zacharias has suggested. But surprisingly, there has been no response for this call and rightly so. People are tired and fatigue has set in with the many fights on their hands, and, primarily because of the fear that one who initiates the process will be left holding the bag. But I regret to say that my above proposal of the formation of GSPEF and GSAEF and/or the procedure that Mr. Zacharias has proposed will fail miserably and completely unless until the promoters who go about identifying possible candidates bring them under one roof, so to speak, on a common minimum programme, before letting them into the Elections fighting ring. Without bonding or binding them to the CMP, all of them would head in different directions once elected and that would be a catastrophe and even worse then the present anarchy in the governance. Besides, by only choosing new faces and letting them go back to the rotten systems of the prevailing political parties would be equally disastrous. Because ultimately, after going through such a lot of trouble, the new faces would have to obey the respective, same, set High and Low commands where their individual voices would be stifled. For they would be getting into the established 'do or die' systems and not the other way round where many a courageous persons have ventured into these established arenas and have been disappointed. Example: George Menezes who had joined the BJP executive and left. The message is that one person or a handful or persons cannot change the establishment. They change you or you get out. What is being sought to be done by Pramod Zacharias above was done years ago. Concerned citizens managed to get possible tailors that they could find, together in one room over eleven brainstorming sessions to stitch a SUIT that would fit all the possible future candidates, with the promoters having to sit back to keep an eye on whether the SUIT was overly stretched and/or giving-in, so that they could come in and rectify/fortify the weakened seams. This was how Goa Su-Raj Party was formed where chances for dissent once embarked on the exercise was drastically reduced if not totally eliminated. A system of governance was set in the mould and once that was done, the mould was destroyed. No body could modify the mould and recast the system again (NO AMMENDMENTS). And ten years down the line we are happy that the system so designed remains intact, irrespective of the pressures building up for it to move forward by diluting the system. Pramod Zacharias has suggested names of Oscar Rebello, Patricia Pinto and others. I don't want to malign anyone, more so these icons of social activism, but this exercise has been undertaken to speak to them on this issue, that they should come forward to lead, to show the right way how the governance of this tiny state is to be conducted. But unfortunately for Goa, both have shied away fearing the reputation of the politics in circulation. Hopefully, enough water has flowed down the Mandovi river that these icons may yet consider this option for Goa's sake. As far as we are concerned (at Goa Su-Raj Party), we have no fear of the stinking reputation that politics in Goa has attained. We have designed the system of governance that cannot be waylaid and/or relapse into the same old stinking gutter because the new faces will be handled by system which has been rendered immune to the mechanics of the prevailing corrupt systems, and who know nothing about or have no previous experience of having been immersed in the stink. Besides, this new system does not rely on the expertise and ingenuity of the players but are expected to drive on the given Road Map, which map is a product of many a minds put to work for a durable end. Goa needs to understand that the national parties have no love for Goa and for its uniqueness. They are here to further their own prospects of using Goa's hospitality to the hilt and in the bargain to conveniently drain its resources. Politically, Goa is a burden for them with only 2 of its meager seats in the Parliament. If Goa has to be wrenched from the clutches of the national parties, Goans will have to search their conscience for the answers. Goa needs to march forward as a role model of 'good-effective-governance' with Goans at the helm of things where Goa's High Command remains undisputable and solidly planted in the sacred soil of Goa and not in the jester's courts of New Delhi. As to when Goans will wake up collectively, this is a million dollar question which can be answered by Goans themselves individually. But wake up they must, collectively, to sound the roar of Goa's ultimate REVOLUTION. Floriano Lobo Gen. Secretary Goa Su-Raj Party 383A, Pirazona Moira-Bardez-Goa-403 507 Tel: (R) 2470223 (M) 9890470896