Following up on the much heated debate about the Lokpal Bill and Mr. Hazare, this post reviews a counter argument presented by some Mr. Mahesh Murthy, currently the Managing Partner of Seedfund (an early-stage venture capital fund), and was also the CEO of Channel V. So this is basically a counter argument to Mr. Murthy’s counter argument to the counter argument written by many people against Lokpal to the initial argument of Jan Lokpal Bill.
Mr. Murthy chose to highlight some key stands taken by the people against Lokpal and then answered them one at a time (which makes it a very nicely structured writing piece).
So, I will just highlight the key points he made and then address them, which will also give you a gist of what Mr. Murthy talked about in his write up. (For any one of you who is interested to read the original write up by Mr. Murthy, it is located on his facebook note page)
I also want to reinforce that this blog is not about saying "I am right! Rest all are fools", instead, it's saying, "I don't agree with you, and this is why, if you think I should agree with you, please tell me why".
Comments by Mr. Murthy is marked in BOLD.
So, the first stand addressed by Mr. Murthy was:-
"We (the civil society experts / bloggers / hand-wringers) know how to fight corruption, but this is not the way".
To which Mr. Murthy answered the following:-
My comment: yeah, who died and made you Gods Of Knowing How To Fight Corruption?
Probably the same people sir, who allowed you to label others as armchair intellectuals, or probably the same people who allowed Mr. Hazare to demand for the Lokpal bill or ask the government to quit, even when it is quite clear that there is a civil society divide on this issue.
The Anna supporters first called any non-lokpal/anna supporter an irresponsible citizen and now people like you label them with “armchair intellectuals”, with all due respect sir, atleast the write ups I have read against the Lokpal, the writers agree that there is a divide between people’s views and really want everyone (including themselves) to reanalyse whether this revolution is needed, we are not going around labelling others.
No one knows how to really fight corruption, but that does not mean “Wow! A Revolution! Awesome, let’s join it”, is the ONLY way to move forward. It MAY be the right way, but since no one knows if it is, I think labelling anyone at this moment is quite foolish.
Social change does not a pattern follow.
Absolutely sir, I agree with you 100%. However, the anna movement, is asking for a revolutionary change. A revolution was needed when Indians were not involved in the constitution of their own country, and thus the freedom fight. A revolution was needed in Egypt and Tunisia, where the dictatorship of a dictator government had forced the citizens to call for revolution, we are talking about citizens who were inching towards suicide as the last option. At the same time, a revolutionary bill like the Patriot Act was NOT needed to fight terrorism, instead it harassed many and ruined the lives of many more.
We have a constitution, why in the blue hell will you need a revolution? We need to understand that this revolution is not against a foreign government, it’s a government elected by us. So how is it a revolution when we go against people elected by us, and overpower them by a committee whom we DO NOT elect?
Revolution is not needed when you have sufficient systems to make a change, what we need is people to change themselves. As I always say, Politicians are not aliens, they are One Of Us, so if we are saying that they have failed, then we as a society have failed too, and just appointing another bunch from the same society, WITHOUT changing the basics or fundamentals of that society is really not that great an idea.
Let's face it, that way (whether it is re-writing the constitution, or some vaguely defined "Reforms 2.0" or Salakar's defence of current legislation) hasn't worked yet, and shows no signs of working yet.
Sir, I am assuming that you never had the awesome experience, which was available even in the early 2000s, of standing in a long que, waiting to submit your application for a telephone at your place. It is an experience which the generation of today is not able to relish, because of the “non-working” Reforms 2.0 you mentioned, as privatisation of telecom industry ensured that now instead of standing in a long que and then paying bribe to a government official, I have a salesman calling me and begging me to get a phone connection.
Privatization of airline industry meant that instead of the unaffordable air fares, which led us to bribe ticket checkers in train to get us a seat, we had trains lowering their fares to match up the already lowered fares of airlines.
Privatization of banks meant I no longer sit in Bank of India with a golden coin/coupon in my hand, waiting for hours for my turn to be serviced by the bank.
I would even go to the extent of giving the example of the Indian Cricket team, the only sport which has a private body running it, we are not the best all the time, but we are the best compared to all the other sports, right?
Reforms never promised to be a revolution like Lokpal Bill, rather it is a system which will slowly take its effect IF implemented slowly but continuously. It is hard and long work, and there’s no easy or quick way out like the Lokpal Bill promises to be.
Well, the supposedly sufficient Indian constitution has resulted in us having an enormous amount of corruption in our lives. However sufficient it might be in theory, it's not sufficient in practice. Perhaps another body - like Hong Kong's ICAC - can help.
However sufficient it might be in theory, it’s not sufficient in practice, is something which applies to Lokpal as much as it does to our Indian Constitution. As I said, it is no easy job, we are all part of the system, politicians are humans too, and so will the people who will run Lokpal. Adding a super government to an already elected government is not HELP. As far as HK’s ICAC goes, you may be right, but there are MANY other corruption free nations which survive without Ombudsman.
Our constitution and law is very similar to the ones used by the British, if they did a fine job with it, and we couldn’t, it means the problem is not in the constitution, it’s in the implementation of it, which in effect rules out any possibility of any new system being introduced, as it will have the same problem of implementation...AGAIN.
You may be right, and the Lokpal may never get corrupt, but the problem is that IF it does, then we have no option about it, as these are people who are not even elected by us, we would have permanently damaged the democracy that we have currently.
Adding a layer of complexity is not in itself a bad thing. It is probably the fastest way to cut through the Gordian knot of legislation and systems we currently have.
With all the curious expressions I can gather, I would like to ask you just one thing about this statement, “How?”. I also hope that you know that appointing Jan Lokpal and Jan Yukta in each state will be quite a “Gordian” system too.
I lived in Hong Kong, and yes there was a lot of corruption that the ICAC unearthed - and it was a truly feared force among businesspeople and government folks.
Here, even the once-feared threat of "CBI investigation" holds no menace to most folks. They know, ultimately, that some flaw, somewhere in the system will let them off.
Well, you said it yourself sir, when even CBI investigation has failed to hold the same menace, do you realize that the “system” was NEVER the issue, it is always the implementation of it, and this is where I say that adding another system is NOT the answer.
You believe anything less than draconian will work here where politicians slime out of even murder cases in our current legislative system with impunity?
A draconian move is needed, most definitely, but an overnight solution, according to me, is not that draconian move. A draconian move is not about a bill which once passed, we don’t know what will happen about it, a draconian move will be when the same amount of people who are going ga ga about Mr. Hazare and Lokpal bill are showing the same enthusiasm to make a change in themselves, and clear the trash at their own place and their own life, before pointing fingers at the system.
If there was really no need for a bill, why would the government offer one - is there not some realisation that yes, we are corrupt, let's try to do a little to either fob off this Hazare fellow like we did last time, or to stem a little of the flow of loot.
The government a lot of times do not feel the need to ask resignations from ministers too, but they have to do it due to political pressure. Have you considered that the government did not want to share the pie with another bunch of “bureaucrats”? But had to accept Lokpal with conditions since Anna created quite a stir? This led to the government version of the bill. Now, there is just political rambling as usual, with two parties trying to outwait the other, while analysing the status quo. The only difference this time is that, this time it’s not ruling party Vs opposition, it is all parties Vs proposed ombudsman.
Finally, in reply to the question, “who will monitor the monitors?”, this was Mr. Murthy’s reply:-
Surely, there's a process to do that. But let's have monitors in the first place - it's far easier to monitor the monitors than to not have monitors at all
Because we have none currently, we get robbed blind.
Really? Then what are the representatives in the Loksabha or Rajyasabha? The government we elect are the monitors who monitor the smooth running of the public services of this country, different ministries (sports, agriculture, rail etc.) monitors different areas. I know they have not done a great job at it. However, that does not change the fact that we already had monitors in place, and now that those monitors have failed (which by the way, we cannot refuse to take the responsibility for, after all, those monitors were ONE OF US), we decide to appoint a monitor to monitor those monitors. So, what next? When these new monitors fail, we appoint another monitor to monitor the monitors who are monitoring the first monitors?
It will never end. As I said, problem is not the system, problem is the implementation of it.
In my lifetime, this is the best shot we've had yet of ridding India of the thieves who constitute our politicians, bureaucrats and government servants.
Let's not screw it up by being crabs-in-the-can who pull down the ones trying to get out.
First of all sir, this “blame the system for all my problems” attitude is not really new, we did it from our living rooms first, and now doing it on the streets, and before ridding India of these “thieves”, we might want to do some reality check about how much WE are responsible for SHIT load of everyday corruption.
As I said at the beginning, labelling wouldn’t really help, as by supporting a revolution, it does not make you a responsible citizen. As Milind Deora tweeted, “Constructive criticism for the jaded: somebody seeking deeper understanding of a bill isn't pro-corruption. It’s called doing your homework!”
