Delhi Diary/By A K B Krishnan

The three crucial ‘d’ factors of democracy are dissent, debate and decision. If there is no dissent, there is no need for debate and decision will be easy. As in the case of lawmakers legislating to give themselves a pay hike.
(This is true of most democracies, including the so-called ‘matured’ ones in the west, but this last time was different in India when the empowered panel’s suggestion to increase salaries and perks of MPs was shot down by the Narendra Modi government and, strangely, there was not much dissent either!)
But in most other instances dissent will be very much in evidence and, therefore, debate becomes necessary before any decision.
Indian democracy though has added a fourth ‘d’ to this list, that of ‘disrupt’. So, from dissent we go straight to disrupt bypassing debate.
Curiously this fourth ‘d’ cuts across the political spectrum so finely and decisively that every single party worth its name has indulged in it in parliament or in state assemblies at one time or the other.
Thus what has been happening in the Indian parliament over the last two weeks, except for the unprecedented suspension of 25 Congress members, is one of a piece with what happened in earlier times, the actors have simply switched roles.
Here’s a sampling of what was said in parliament that could illustrate this switching of roles, and the attendant irony of it all, better: “The daily routine of disruptions, adjournments and shouting in the House is leading many outside to question the efficacy of the institution and faith in public affairs...” If you thought this line was said by Prime Minister Narendra Modi, think again. It was Manmohan Singh, then Prime Minister, speaking in parliament on May 14, 2012 during the 60th year celebration of India’s parliament. Here’s another, this time from none other than Sonia Gandhi at the same function three years ago: “The MPs’ conduct must rise to the highest ethical standards.”
Congress MP Shashi Tharoor, articulate as ever, had this to say about the BJP-led disruptions during Manmohan Singh’s second term as Prime Minister: “To those of us who sought election to parliament in order to participate in thoughtful debate on how to move India forward, and to deliberate on the laws by which we would be governed, the experience has been deeply disillusioning.”
Perhaps mindful of what Gandhi had said about ethical standards, Tharoor tried to stick to his stated opinion last week. But the Congress president seemed to have set new standards—or changed goalposts, if you like-for her party as she quickly admonished Tharoor and asked him to fall in line.
Between 2012 and 2014 the Congress Party was indeed finding the going tough against some very disruptive tactics by the opposition led by the Bharatiya Janata Party in the wake of multi-billion dollar scams that finally sounded the death knell of the Manmohan Singh government. The shoe is on the other foot now. Scams and scandals have started tumbling out of the BJP cupboard.
So, people like Finance Minister Arun Jaitley, who as the then leader of the opposition in the Rajya Sabha had justified the BJP’s disruptive politics as a “legitimate democratic process”, are finding it difficult to tell the Congress to behave.
But do two wrongs make a right? The Congress and its comrade-in-arms the CPI(M) do not want to answer this. They would only iterate the fact that it is the responsibility of the government of the day to see that parliament functions smoothly.
Political parties are nothing if they cannot bend reason to suit their need and the Congress Party is no exception. If, as the Congress claims, running parliament is the government’s responsibility, didn’t Modi do well in the budget session when a record 24 bills, including the one on the land boundary agreement with Bangladesh, were passed by both the Houses?
Equally importantly, for the first time in 36 years a private member’s bill, moved by Tiruchi Siva of the DMK seeking equal opportunities for transgenders, was passed by the Rajya Sabha.
The 35 sittings of the Lok Sabha in the budget session was the highest for the past five years. You cite these examples and the Congress jumps to take credit for them too saying but for its cooperation these bills would not have been passed.
Now we all know that eating the cake and having it too is a favourite pastime for political parties.
The BJP, too, tried to do something similar by getting the 25 protesting MPs suspended for five days. Yes, it was Speaker Sumitra Mahajan’s decision and she must have taken it independent of any advice from the ruling party.
But Trinamool Congress’ Derek O’Brien dropped more than a hint about the BJP’s hand in the suspensions when he said he had heard fellow-MPs discussing the matter in the central hall of parliament at least an hour before it actually happened.
Mahajan said she was forced to take the drastic step because these members were “persistently and wilfully obstructing the House”.
But what Mahajan’s act has achieved is to galvanise the opposition still further. Two weeks of protest was beginning to take its toll even on the Congress Party as several members were getting around to the view that the party should look for a compromise formula.
But the suspensions have re-ignited the dying embers. What is more, at least nine other opposition parties are making common cause with the Congress on the suspension. More drama is in the offing.

Butting heads
Legislature, executive and the judiciary are the three broad divisions that are expected to work independently and collectively to make democracy a success. There has got to be a bonding among these three arms even as each of these keeps a close check on the other two.
But if “money is the bond of all bonds” (Karl Marx), the one who looks after the affairs of money for the country must figure very highly in the list of those who help keep democracy ticking.
Central banks are the nerve centres of all economic activity in any country, more so in a democracy. To be able to design and implement monetary policies, these banks are almost always headed by top experts in the field. It is no different in India where Raghuram Rajan, as Governor of the Reserve Bank of India (RBI), is widely respected the world over.
Rajan’s handling of India’s financial health even as many Eurozone economies and China floundered in the aftermath of the Greek debacle has brought wholesome praise from Nobel laureates and economists. Prime Minister Narendra Modi described Rajan as the “perfect” man for the job.
But if the man is perfect, why divest him of his powers?
The Modi government is reportedly planning to strip the RBI Governor of the power to veto any decision taken by the Monetary Policy Committee (MPC) which, among other things, sets the interest rates for all banks.
According to these reports, the government also plans to give itself the powers to appoint four of the nine members of the MPC, thereby reducing it to a virtual arm of the ruling dispensation. (Finance Secretary Rajiv Mehrishi has tried to downplay the reported move but did not reject it outright.)
Ever since Modi came to power, there has been friction between his government and the RBI Governor, mainly on the subject of lowering of interest rates.
Finance Minister Arun Jaitley has a clear roadmap of what is best for the country, but so has Rajan, at least in terms of its financial health.
Jaitley has said in more than one public forum that he found the RBI wanting in aggression when it comes to interest rates. Jaitley looks at low interest rates as a means to attract investments and boost the economy but Rajan’s first priority is to keep inflation under check and for this interest rates have to be managed more carefully.
Conservatism, rather than aggression, is the guiding principle for Rajan who, in spite of falling crude prices and near-normal monsoon, refused to cut the repo rates yesterday from its 7.25% level.
Having promised jobs and a better standard of living, it is politically expedient for Modi and Jaitley to see lower interest rates so as to boost borrowings by industrialists. But there are adverse long-term consequences to such ad hoc arrangements and its Rajan’s duty to maintain a sustainable economic environment by battling inflation.
The RBI Governor is today the sole decision maker in terms of interest rates, an arrangement that has stood the test of time for India. By getting its nominees to dictate terms to the central bank and its policies, the Modi government could be biting more than it can chew. Already the government is at loggerheads with the Supreme Court in the matter of appointment of judges to higher courts. And now this!