The bane of politics in India is that governments provide simplistic solutions that create more problems than they resolve. Responses of the opposition too are often not thought through. Decision-making is far removed from providing workable and effective solutions, especially in the context of highly complex issues. By and large, the political class in India is bereft of domain expertise.
The bureaucracy mired in rules and regulations has a field day. As a consequence, decisions do not adequately address the dynamics of our societal structures and the complexity of caste equations, which jeopardise outcomes. Besides, those in power are prone to making public pronouncements that catch the headlines but are often ill-conceived.
The horrific incidents of rape and molestation of women and girl children are required to be addressed in a variety of ways and at various levels. The simplistic solution pursuant to the heart-rending Nirbhaya incident resulted in amendments in the law, providing for the death penalty and hoping that it would act as a deterrent. Yet, incidents of rape have not decreased.
Now the perpetrators attempt to destroy evidence by either eliminating the victim or ensuring that she is not in a position to give evidence. Amendments to the law alone are not a solution. While imposition of harsh penal provisions has public support, we need to recognise the dynamics of caste and societal relationships that need to be addressed to change mindsets. A parallel social reform movement with an effective outreach is needed. This is possible only if we analyse, through research, the dynamics of societal relationships and what needs to be done in the context thereof.
The PM’s simplistic solution of demonetising Rs 500 and Rs 1,000 currency notes on 8 November 2016, ostensibly to target black money, terrorism and fake currency, was a monumental error. He chose to disregard the dislocations it would cause, both in terms of business activity and its impact on the poor, who lacked the wherewithal to exchange demonetised currency with legal tenders.
The decision had no impact on getting rid of black money, reducing incidents of terrorist attacks and fake currency. It hardly impacted the rich, who used the system to protect themselves by illegally exchanging their unaccounted money. This is a scandal that requires investigation. The steep decline of our economy owes its genesis to this decision. The intent, of course, was to gain popular support without any concern for its economic and societal consequences. Dealing with the dynamics of unaccounted cash and terrorist activities requires a well-thought-out strategy. Demonetisation was of no relevance to its stated objectives.
The decision to amend the Constitution to provide for a Goods and Services Tax (GST) instead of a multiplicity of taxes was a sound initiative, but again, the solution was simplistic. Its negative impact on the economy is being felt even today. The objective was to simplify the tax structure, but what we got instead was a multiplicity of rates. The outcome was complex, which stakeholders could not cope with, especially small businessmen as well as wholesalers and retailers, who neither had the financial resources nor the technical support system to comply with the requirements of highly complex rules and regulations. Projections made to compensate states in hindsight were unrealistic.
The result is that the GST Council is neither able to provide satisfactory solutions to the shortfalls in collections nor adequately compensate states because of the economic slump. Policy decisions, when taken, must envisage alternative pathways in the event assumptions go awry. Recent legislations amending farm laws, legalising contract farming and allowing for transactions outside of APMCs resulted in SAD breaking its 24-year-old alliance with the BJP. Both the decision to give an option to the farmer and its opposition are simplistic unless we understand the dynamics of the market in Punjab and Haryana in particular and the dynamics of social relationships in the context of the agricultural community in both states.
Such a solution is bound to raise suspicion and have political ramifications. Contract farming involves two players, one of whom, namely the farmer, is disempowered and will have very little negotiating heft when dealing with corporate entities. In some ways, it might provide for greater flexibility, but it will also sow the seeds of exploitation without the farmer having recourse to being dealt with fairly. The 64% small and marginal farmers, for whom APMCs are vital for sustenance, are unlikely to attract the attention of corporate players. For the government to say that the Minimum Support Price (MSP) is essential for food security is fine, but we are aware that the Food Corporation of India, with its godowns overflowing given that the market price is much lower than the MSP, will hardly be in a position to procure at least wheat at the same level at which it used to in the past.
The impetuous decision to announce a countrywide lockdown on 24 March 2020 caused dislocations of a magnitude the country has never witnessed before. Migrant labourers were left stranded and had to fend for themselves. Despite public statements of state outreach, the spectacle of thousands of hapless, jobless and forlorn victims deciding to make their way home would have put to shame any public authority who claimed that all was well. Many had to walk or cycle hundreds of kilometres, holding on to their meagre belongings. Some of them succumbed to the trauma inherent in such an effort. The government neither gave time for the dislocated migrant labourers to reach their respective destinations nor had a well-thought-out plan to manage their stay or onward journey.
Our political class should realise that its fundamental duty is to cater for justice at all levels and provide for thoughtful solutions rather than being obsessed with electoral success. Such simplistic and imprudent solutions will only cater to destabilise both our political and societal structures. This in turn will diminish the values embedded in our Constitution. The object of politics is to make sure the state realises the core values that are the bedrock of our constitutional structure. What we need is governance with a human face.
Kapil Sibal
Senior lawyer, Congress leader and member of Rajya Sabha (Tweets @KapilSibal)