New Delhi:
The beginning of the month was marked by several dramatic events - the withdrawal of a 'criminal' ordinance symbolically on Mahatma Gandhi's birth anniversary, the conviction of two former chief ministers and a landmark judgment by the Supreme Court, allowing for the first time in India a right to choose 'None Of The Above' in an election. What does this all add up to? Can it no longer be politics as usual? Will 2014's election campaign actually see a different kind of politics? Diplomat and former Governor of West Bengal Gopal Gandhi, former chief election commissioner Dr S Y Quraishi, professor at IIM Bangalore, Dr Rajeev Gowda and Olympic medalist and former army officer Colonel Rajyavardhan Singh Rathore discuss the issues that are changing India.
NDTV: Good evening and welcome to the NDTV Dialogues, a conversation on issues that are changing India. Tonight we are looking at the dramatic last ten days to the withdrawal of the so-called criminal ordinance, symbolically on Mahatma Gandhi's birth anniversary. Also the conviction of two former chief ministers and a landmark Supreme Court judgment, which for the first time gives Indian voters the 'right to choose' none of the above in elections. What does this actually means for Indian politics? Are we actually in a new era or are these first signs of the green shoots of change? Joining me tonight for this Dialogue, I am joined by Gopal Gandhi, former Governor of West Bengal and a former diplomat. Thank you for coming in Sir. SY Quraishi, former Chief Election Commissioner of India and I am also joined by Dr.Rajeev Gowda, professor at IIM Bangalore and representing the Congress and from the BJP, Olympic medalist and former colonel in Indian Army, Col Rajyavardhan Singh Rathore. Thank you all for coming in. Mr Gopal Gandhi, you have been keen observer of politics when you were serving as Governor, when you were a diplomat as well, and now your perspective as somebody who has talked so much about the need to clean up, not only politics, but our citizenry on the impact of these decisions.
Gopal Gandhi: I must thank you for mentioning the three incidents as you call them. Each of them has something in common. The withdrawal of the proposed Ordinance came after an indication that the President had certain misgivings about it. The conviction of the former Chief Ministers is a legal step and the third is also a legal step emanating from the Supreme Court of India. All these three have happened, as a result of the initiatives of what we called Constitutional authorities as opposed to mainstream bodies of elective representatives. Yes, the President is of course elected, but he is the senior in the architecture of the Constitution of India. The country has warmed to these three steps, which is indicative of the fact that the country reposes great faith today in Constitutional authorities and I am not suggesting that its faith in elected representatives has evaporated. It has not, but it has taken a back seat. Today there is no denial that people's faith in Constitutional authorities embodies that, which are headed and operated by individuals, who are appointed to those offices. The President's position is being a unique position, that is a very important fact .The people's confidence in the Election Commission is obvious, it doesn't have to be stated. Its confidence in the process of election as monitored and mentored by the Election Commission is very strong. Its confidence in the elected representative is very strong. Its confidence in the Judiciary is very strong. I am very glad today we have a senior colonel from the Army. Its confidence in the Armed Forces is very strong. So what does all this mean in a living, vibrant, largest democracy of the world? Why is it that the people of India are looking to the non-elected bodies, to what may be called political reassurance is just the question I put?
NDTV: That's interesting, unusual. Politicians, they still come to electoral democracy, that's an interesting trend but Dr Quraishi I want to bring you in because I know that for you it's given some sense of satisfaction as Chief Election Commissioner, because the Electoral Reform Bill has been pending in Parliament for over 20 years. What about electoral reforms? If we did this, half of what India wants would have been achieved. Do you think there's some way towards getting to the crux of it, where political parties don't give tickets actually to those with criminal backgrounds? This is what is really needed now as the next thrust
Dr Quraishi: Yes quite right. Election Commission has been demanding these reforms for the last 20 years, but for the fact that the government was sitting over these proposals, the Judiciary started coming in. It's good that these reforms are happening but it is not the healthiest way that reforms should come. The reforms should come through Parliament, through government. When government is not fulfilling its mandate that is when civil society goes to the Supreme Court and most of the recent reforms from the last 5-10 years have only come from the Supreme Court. To start with the file, every candidate has to file two affidavits giving his criminal cases and financial background. This came from the Supreme Court and the government was opposing it. All the culmination of that is what you now see by the admission of the candidates. We have 162 MP's who have criminal cases pending against them, it is in their own affidavit and the fact that money power is playing is going out of control. The kind of quality we are having is leaving people very disillusioned and there is a situation where the people's perception about the politics and the politicians is at the lowest stage, which I would like to say, is very dangerous for democracy. I have often said that you can't love democracy and hate politicians but that seems to be the situation, which is dangerous. India has become the superpower thanks to the good politician. There are good politicians, but why it is that the good politicians are not keeping the bad ones away? Mr Gandhi's rightly said that criminal candidates are given the tickets in the first place. Sometimes the politician says that it is for the people to reject them, but what about your own responsibility? Why do you give them tickets and their standard answer is that they are so desperate to win, the concept of win-ability, whosoever can win the elections, even if it is a criminal must be given a ticket. I dare say they have not tried the alternative concept. Let them say boldly that they will not give ticket to a criminal even if they lose the election. I have no doubt in my mind that people will support them.
NDTV: Col Rathore do you think that can actually happen? You have taken a step into politics, why did you choose to take that, beyond of course the fact that you joined at the Narendra Modi rally? Didn't you feel the popular perception, sab neta chor hai? You can't change the system. What can you actually do? You have come from an Army, one of India's trusted institutions into something, which is actually reviled nowadays.
Rajyavardhan Singh Rathore: It is very interesting now that you have asked me these questions and of course I connect with what Mr Gandhi had said, that there are institutions that are respected. And yet the true institutions that actually can make a difference to this country, actually can reach out, has the enormous power to do that and is the one, which is not respected. Right. Now, why is the gap? It is because of leadership and because of leadership everything can change. And if there is a leadership deficit, then like Mr Dipankar Gupta says in his book 'Revolution from Above', citizen elite must come in to take that role, to occupy that space and bring in that leadership. I mean, it's so important today when we are sitting on a demographic dividend or on a demographic bomb, it could be either way. We have a bulge of population of about 46 cores today, which could be about 60 cores in about 2020.Now, either we will emerge out perhaps the best nation in the world or we will perish. It is how you handle this large youth now. Therefore, the leadership crisis is even more important and the fact that we are discussing this today brings into prominence the fact that we need great leadership. Great leadership will make our democracy even better and greater.
NDTV: Dr.Rajeev Gowda, if I can bring you in because you are of course with the Congress. You are also a professor teaching students at the IIM Bangalore. How do you tell your students, for instance when this Ordinance was passed by the Cabinet, it seemed Parliament, it had not gone through the Parliament, suddenly Cabinet clears the Ordinance, how do you explain this to your students?
Rajeev Gowda: Well, there is a legalistic way of explaining it, about everyone having the right to appeal and then the conundrums that would be caused when someone is disqualified and then actually acquitted. So those sorts of discussions take place. But at large, the underlying story is what actually emerges. When Rahul Gandhi essentially dramatically denounced that Ordinance, he was essentially reflecting public opinion on the subject and the public opinion is that we should not shield criminals and we need to get rid of them. But there is a larger story, just like Mr Gopal Gandhi pointed out. All these things, there is thread connecting them, and that thread is institutions that matter. And in the political world what happened is we created the laws and framework that have allowed the situation to deteriorate. Let me give one example, for example there is a limit as to how much you can spend on a Lok Sabha election, 25 lakh for a voting population of maybe 20 lakh. Rs 1.25 per voter, right. This is a farce, okay. As a result of this, what happens is that you drive all expenditures underground and who can play and flourish underground; people with black money, people with criminal background and networks who can actually work the system in that manner. So if you were to just say, let's get rid of that limit or make it realistic or make it 20 cores, or whatever, it will last for a while. Well, bring everything out in the open and then a candidate who can raise legal white money can also compete without being disqualified. See today, I can raise cores in white money for an election. I cannot spend more than 25 lakhs if I want to be a clean honest candidate. Right, can I compete with anybody else? No. In fact this is one of the big stories about why people who are professionals, people who have clean records are often passed over for dubious candidates.
NDTV: No but, the other side of the question is how can a professional raise that much money? Dr Quraishi wanted to answer that limit, okay
Rajeev Gowda: No, no, no. Let me answer that. A lot of people who have done well in India, who are interested in contributing to India's growth, to selecting and backing the kinds of leaders and leaderships that Rajyavardhan Singh Rathore just talked about. It is not a new phenomenon. Birla backed Gandhiji. It's not you know, it's something that can be done. The important thing is to bring it out in the open first. Today also the funding goes on but behind the scenes. You don't know what, who is pulling what strings. If everything comes out into the open, you know transparency will flourish. Sunlight acts as a disinfectant, good things will happen. But more than anything else, I am not suggesting that you raise money only from the fat cats, you can raise money from a large number of people. Today the Indian citizen, they use democracy as something that happens for free. Right. Actually we all have to participate not just by voting, but by showing up at rallies, contributing ideas, signing petitions and getting rid of the ordinance and contributing. It could be char anna, which Mahatma Gandhi used to advocate for the Congress, the char anna membership, or for that matter contribute to give a 1000 rupees and it will all add up. That's how Obama came in.
NDTV: That's what Narendra Modi has, that ten rupees often for his rallies you have Rs 10. Perhaps that's an idea you should implement
Rajeev Gowda: The rally is paid for by various other crony capitalists, I am not getting into that
NDTV: People want to contribute, Dr Quraishi there have been many views on this?
Dr Quraishi: Yes exactly, there have been many views. First of all Mr Professor Gowda its not 25 now it is 40 lakhs, and by any case it's his question, nobody has been able to say the ideal limit. So we can talk to political parties that even it is too high. This puts premium on rich people, the poor people cannot contest, so obviously the fact that it provides good logic, but what should be the cap? What is the rational? Let them get back to all politicians. Limit is not decided by the Election Commission, by the government, but on our request to the Law Ministry, Railway Ministry to raise it from 25 to 40, from 10 to 16.You know that is a time when Tamil Nadu and West Bengal and Kerala went to elections and you know how much out of 16, how much was reported average? Reporting was less than 50 percent. Some candidate say they spend 4 lakhs, some said 5 lakhs, some said they did not spend a rupee on publicity. Professor Gowda now when you talk about ratonalisation, it will be not from 16 to 60 and you will say 16 to 6 because that's what you are actually spending
Rajeev Gowda: No, no
NDTV: So you are starting off your election career or political career byline?
Dr Quraishi: We are forced ...
Rajeev Gowda: Because otherwise you are going to get disqualified
Dr Quraishi: 16 lakh has gone, could have gone, why you are hiding
Rajeev Gowda: The basic point is that whole thing is, it is treated as a distraction and what I am saying is just giving you one example of a flaw in our system that if we correct, we will open up space for new people and clean people to come in. And that when we talk about moving towards clean up politics we should also talk about who are the people going to man that politic
Dr Quraishi: When we announce the Election we give notice to all the arm licensees to deposit their arms, in fact they used to bank it. Then the court's say you can't bank it, people like the guard and others, but can issue individual notices. Through that 80 percent, 90 percent of the licensees are to deposit their arms. More than the licenses it is the unlicensed arms, which we see just as more than the white money, it is the black money, which we are targeting in elections. The reason, the last few elections have been totally bloodless, totally peacefully, which had inspired people to come with confidence to come and vote. The fact that women have outvoted men because there would be no more guns and bombs in polling stations and is a very happy development
Rajyavardhan Singh Rathore: In fact we could add what both of you said Sir, that you know, solution to this, your rules will restrict, but the final solution, this will come by the government of people. That's what leadership would lead to, governance, empowering the people, educating the people. They have been able to take decisions and thereafter these musclemen, money power, would gradually reduce in terms of influence. That is something we need to come. That can only thought of, of course catching the other side of the cycle so that's important this, leaders need to do
NDTV: How we see a turning point, in some sense the churning in politics as usual. Dr Gowda one aspect, looking particularly at the Congress government, the whole concept is with various announcements, Right to Food, the Land Acquisition Bill etc. Congress is catering to a vote base in Rural India. They don't care for middle class urban India, because they feel that's not where you get votes from, that's why many people are surprised after a sudden turn around, by Rahul Gandhi, with the Ordinance. Thus the Congress does not realise a shift, a huge amount of 12 core first time voters. Are we going to see voters also who do not want to see politics as usual? Does Congress recognise that?
Rajeev Gowda: Well in Congress' platform and manifesto are rights-based laws that are aimed at empowering the poorest of poor. They are aimed at inclusive growth, an agenda that really is focused on those who are left behind by India's dramatic progress. Oh no, no, you know, Parliament didn't function for many years thanks to BJP obstructing it. The basic point is these are all in the way. They have been studied and then promulgated. The issue is what the philosophy behind it is. We are not going to say, we are not going to look behind those who have fallen behind. We are going to create a social safety net and we are going to bring people forward. The challenge is to sell it to the people who have benefited most from modern India's success, the urban, educated, the middle class, the people who have seceded from political engagement historically, ironically, but now are in large numbers to make a difference particularly. So these are people whose conscious needs to be awakening .You can't really create a situation where inequality becomes the biggest thing happening in India. We need to find a way to include people and give them a chance to compete as well. These are highly political and contentious issues and when you talk about this topic like reservation, we can see divides between those who are already empowered and in the system and successful, and those who are trying to be successful and those who are trying to break in. So in the same manner that what all politics, new politics should be about the debate, discussion and above this
No, No, the point is it is not necessarily vote bank politics. We are not doing this to pander to one side or other. We are doing this, what is right for the country and for bringing all section forward, that's really it. New politics should be, you know. When I think about new politics in the media environment, in the social media environment, its much more polarized, much more demising politicians and I mean this is not the way to have civil debate and discussions, and it also creates a environment where the only people you look up to are dictators, people who are; you know when you talk about leadership Rajyavardhan, the leadership also means you know, decisive, so divisive leaders become decisive and in the process what we forget is that politics is all about compromise, about listening to other points of view and convincing people, and that's what Parliament's job is all about. And that politics we see less off, whether it's on TV debates, whether it's in the vicious environment of social media
Rajyavardhan Singh Rathore: Actually I didn't want to get into politics of it. Since you have opened it may I add a little comment on it? Now when we talk about empowerment, when your leaders talk about dreams, let me assure you the youth of this country don't dream about chapatti, what chapatti in a day? The youth of this country dream about empowerment in terms of education, infrastructure, we have a huge fiscal deficit, no problems we can make money out of that. If you invest that huge amount of money into just feeding people, that does not reproduce more money, more jobs, therefore empowerment, then we would go in for the fiscal deficit. Now that's where vision comes and that's where decisive leaders take decisive decisions in terms of future of the country. We bring in empowerment by investing into infrastructure. Therefore, you have more job creation. Also let me tell you about, you spoke about divisiveness. Now they have, certain political parties have one issue and they have caught into that issue and which makes me wonder whether the riots have taken over this whole country. If that be so, I would be hundred percent with you, but imagine the number of riots that have taken place in this country. Various political parties, I need not name the political party and also assure you after 2002 there have not been any riots in the state of Gujarat
NDTV: Mr Gandhi the point raised, which is interesting in that sense. Divisiveness, where issues about what kind of politics, what cleaning up of politics, but we are looking more at polarized politics and in the context of Uttar Pradesh, what happened of course, a Chief Minister who is not from the BJP, Rajyavardhan Rathore would point out
Gopal Gandhi: Let me adhere to your scheme for larger discussion. There is polarization in India today and you could not have imagined a greater polarization in India than obtained in the period 1947 to 1952, there was huge polarization especially on religious line. Partition was a very raw boned, but the first Cabinet to the government of India, the first Cabinet headed by Jawaharlal Lal Nehru had people in it who were nothing to do with Congress. They were national figures. There was Ambedkar, Shanmukham Chetty and John Mathai. They were not even politicians. They were people from a large arena of public life and there was briefly Shyama Prasad Mukherjee as well. I am looking at a way out of polarized and divisive politics. I am looking in fact at what may be a hung Parliament and the role of the President of India at that point of time. The President has to find a Prime Minister who will command a majority in the House. Nobody knows what mood of the people will lead to in terms of number in seats in Parliament. But there could be a situation when the country will need a government that not only commands majority and the confidence of the House, but commands the people of India and it will be perfectly possible to go beyond the narrow allies of party politics and give to the country a government which could consist of many elected Members of Parliament, and many who are not in that first House automatically, but who will get elected in 6 months. And then I think the President and PM of the day could send a surge of new confidence among the people and if they were to elect individuals, if they were introduce into government individuals who command a national confidence, who command respect, not just political respect, but professional, individual respect, and then I think the point which Rajyavardhan ji made about leadership will acquire possibly and I think the time has come for absolutely new initiatives to be taken within the four corners of the Constitution of India. And this was done in the first 5 years existence of an independent country and I do not see why it should not been done now. Let me take a second call and that is this politics is only seen as political parties, the Constitution of India does not mention political parties and reference to political parties has come into the Constitution of India. As a result and subject and disqualification of members who change parties. Otherwise there is no reference of political parties in the Constitution. It means the Constitution of India says we need a Parliament. It does not say we need so many parties and I have nothing against parties. Parties serve very well. Quraishi Saab said we have excellent politicians in our country but I think the country is now ready for a government which is not narrowly politically, but which is broadly representative, inclusive as you said, Dr Gowda, more than anything else. So transparently reliable trust is what is needed.
NDTV: Of course Dr Quraishi, that many worry how our elections do become arithmetic, that the leader of the country, the PM could actually be conceptually somebody who has may be 10 MPs or 11 MPs, could actually be because it could be arithmetic. Do you think that only can be changed?
Dr Quraishi: First of all I would like to comment on divisiveness of Indian politics. It's one of the greatest ironies that the electoral system is improving, governance quality has led to divisiveness of the society and six years ago people who did not know their caste, sub, sub caste. We know the group and vote bank. Similarly polarization with the party, and even when we overcome divided society and moved on, but unfortunately in last years this division has increased and we need to look at that, because elections would be leading to that. Similar peculiar divisiveness and that's also happening, which is why we are not able to get a mandate for parties because now everyone is their own sweeper and their own party. It's very profitable for a politician to break away if he has any influence. Earlier he used to bargain for a single seat for himself, now he realizes then he walks away for a better position to bargain. And Mr Gandhi said though if one party rules or may be two party rules you could choose your Cabinet of your quality and here your coalition partner dictates whether you like him or not, whether this criminal is not, you have to appoint him minister otherwise, we will walk out and this is what happening. We need to find a way out
NDTV: Interesting, some of the Prime Ministerial candidates mentioned, both are outsiders within their own systems, whether Narendra Modi or Rahul Gandhi. But just to ask Col Rathore, moving away from that, looking at the other impact we have mentioned, that's coincidental of course, but the fact two former Chief Ministers have been sent to jail by a Ranchi Court. What's the impact of something, which goes like that, after a 17-year case and 22 years of case, Rashid Masood who is a CWC member, Rajya Sabha MP? Does it impact that however high and powerful you may be, you will end up as law does catch up with you?
Rajyavardhan Singh Rathore: This is a welcome change. Unbelievable to some and therefore even more welcome and perhaps this is an emergence of new politics that we are today talking of, about, that this will become routine. In case if you are at fault you will be punished for it and therefore politicians, whoever is in power, should careful about his action and cannot feel untouchable. Now one point Krishna ji said, the leadership. If you look at Independence time, that's the leadership, which we need today, which wasn't party based, which was for a Cause. The cause was for Independence. That point in time today, the Cause can be development of the nation and that's the time we came in, excelling in their own fields, just because they had a particular cause. Now today we may have party politics but if we put nation first its again very individual based. Some people will do it some people will not. First put the nation first and put the party later. Now actions would determine whatever decisions you take, would be in the benefit of nation. I really don't want to touch on the divisive topics, which were said, I will just make one small comment, that there people; there are political parties. The whole constituency is a certain community, what if they lose that community? How desperate they are to hold on that community and therefore they will wake up all the issues, to make sure there is fear in the community that community can only survive through a political party. So both ways, so people, individuals must understand, must look through the hype, which any one creates for getting votes. They have to see through it, look at the development not look at caste. It's very clear, calculated, do the mathematics, who will win? Unless we don't go beyond that the nation will not develop
NDTV: How do we do that Dr Gowda, looking at national perspective, India first? Whether Mr Gandhi thought that out? How do we look at developing that, because many would have said, I interviewed Ram Guha this week, he made this point, that secularism is a word that has been contaminated by the Congress party which is why I used pluralism. Does the Congress also need to look at cleansing itself if you want to move forward?
Dr Gowda: I think it's a larger system that we need to cleanse itself and that cleansing; no it's the same thing, for some its appeasement, for some anything itself and if appeasement was for particular community they should be the most prosperous community in the country. The sacha community will clearly tell you in any case. So it's a political hot potato. We should not go down that path, let's just talk about realities of political careers. What does it take to bring good people in the system? A political career is a full time job, right, you are asking me? No I have taken leave without my pay you know to get ready for Parliament elections that are coming up. So this sort of thing, who is going to feed my family? Am I going to live on fresh air? Then up and down career, sometimes you succeed sometimes you don't. You need to be resilient, a risk taker, someone who can build consensus you know, all sort of that thing. But you need hundreds and thousands of such people in this system. Where are they going to come up? When we talk about professionals, professional at least have made their pile and they are coming in that sense its good. Many of them would absolutely therefore not be enticed by various opportunities to make money, something like that. But if you look at the Chief Ministers or politicians that have gone to jail, part of the reason why various political leaders, and I am not excusing them for a second you know, to get into this whole act of money making, because for running a political party also costs money, where is that coming from? See I am not obsessed with this issue. I am just pointing out it's a stark reality than to be in denial in this country. You remember that phase, its lots of money to keep the Mahatma in poverty. The idea of Ashram going, thousands of people are there and someone is going to feed them, whatever the case may be this interpretation. We've got to create open sources though state funding. Yogendra Yadav had an interesting suggestion. He said you know, fine this is not perfect with every election. In the next election give every political party Rs 100 per vote they get in each constituency. Put it in a bank account and that can be used for legitimate political purposes over the next 5 years. Elections now, something like that, something like that will allow you to run a political party and will allow political workers, who are not deep pocketed, but competent, to play the game. Today if you come into a political party you can ask who are the competitors? They will say somebody who has either win-ability, has many features like, but one feature crucial is money. It could be charisma and star power. Rajyavardhan Rathore here and other types as well and I as well. The basic point is there are so many dimensions, but if you bring something like that, why we need to bring state funding? Because we all want politics but we are not paying for it, only way we can make that happen is by taking it out of taxes, so let's think through systematic changes, which suddenly open up the playing field. But the fact that that these former Chief Ministers have gone to jail, that now we are looking at a situation where the corrupt and criminal are not going to triumph, that the tainted are going to give way to the sainted. You know this is something that it's really exciting because so far we are varied in disillusion and the other question of yours....
NDTV: Of course all parties have a choice again whom they can choose and give tickets to.
Dr Gowda: Who has the muscle power or money power and that's what matters. This is also coming, as Dr Quraishi pointed out civil society is taking an interest. The urban middle class is now finally discovering that they have political strength to standup and express their voice, and for Congress or any other party to ignore upsurge, something, that is not politically astute. There are 150 urban seats in India today in Parliament including my Bangalore. So we have to find out a way to create a platform to bring in people and to showcase what a good candidate the Congress has, or any political party has. You know to inspire voters to come forward and participate
NDTV: In the final round of The Dialogues, he used another quote that it needs lot of money to keep the Mahatma in poverty, but just to ask about a certain quote, reference to both your illustrious grandfathers, Mahatma Gandhi said about C Rajagopalachari that he is the keeper of my conscience. Who is the keeper for a national conscience? Or it has come at a stage that the whole, whether it was Bureaucracy, as it was polity had become corrupt to a degree, nothing could change and even the movements who tried to change, Anna Hazare's movement, many were disappointed it fizzled out, and the Aam Aadmi party, a new entrant to politics, a level of cynicism which we seem to greet any change. How do we change that national movement? Who is the keeper of conscience?
Gopal Gandhi: I am very glad that you referred to that quote. Can you imagine when a person of the veracity of Mahatma Gandhi says he needs someone to keep his conscience he knew that there is nobody invaluable. When the Father of the Nation said he needs somebody to be keeper of his conscience, you are conceding the importance of fallibility and the acknowledgement of fallibility. Now politics does not acknowledge its fallibility. It is cocksure and that is something that has to change. Its cocksureness has taken the place of normal, whole good wholesome confidence, that is where the rot started and that is where reversal must also start from, so thank you for that quote. I just go back to what is now a favorite of mine, being the Constitution of India. The Constitution of India very broadly and Quraishi Saab knows very well on this table, has provisions relating to electoral representatives of people, provisions related to Constitution authority, the elected representative of people, provisions reflect the self-confidence and assurance of the Constitution. The Constitutional authority provisions represent the principle of criticism and self-analysis and self-correction, that imbalance has to be prepared. There has become imbalance. Due to flux of time and cocksureness the Constitution authority is assertive and the people of India want them to be assertive, and likely, the Supreme Court says none of this above. The people like that. A Ranchi court sends a Chief Minister to jail, people seem to understand that, and something says ache hi hue. The President of India is not comfortable with the draft Ordinance. He doesn't return the file. He expresses himself, the file is returned. These are self-corrective mechanisms of Constitution. We cannot have imbalance. There has to be balance and the political element has to be in the driver seat, there is no question of it. But I think in the next decade we can be sure that what is often called over activism on the part of Judiciary, or excessive energies in articulation of Information Commission, Vigilance Commission, we will see and see more than that. I think public will want that they will applaud that is not a healthy situation. President's Rule in a state is very popular, that's not a healthy situation. We have to have a political system, elected system, dem
ocratic system. We should not be diminished. But the diminish-isation has been done by the political class by itself, it's not done something else by agenda. In the next few years we have to see restoration of the balance between the overconfident, cocksure politics of our country and the overactive self-corrective mechanism of our Constitution mechanism, and somebody has to go back to what Rajyavardhan Rathore ji said, someone has to take, lead a country like India, whether it is time of Nehru or Shastri or Rajiv Gandhi, Indira Gandhi, briefly VP Singh. The country responds to a leader who is very, very appealing and that leader has to be a leader who is seen as a leader by the whole country, by sections of the country and certainly not by feared by any section of the country. That is very important, that is what is supremely important
NDTV: We have to end this Dialogue here. We are completely out of time. We'll see what happens in 2014. It has been a landmark week. Thank you very much for joining me tonight