The issue of parliamentary election in our country surfaced recently with a few passing remarks of the Prime Minister. Reportedly at a media-meet at Bangalore on February 12 last, he elaborated his call for “collective mobilization of the will of the nation and a broad national consensus” to fight corruption under a national agenda. To him, state funding of elections should be on that national agenda as one of the vital issues, with a need for a national consensus to ensure greater transparency in financing of political parties and spending on elections. He argued, “Financing political parties is a major source of generation of black income in our country. No single party can say that it can deal with the problem by itself” and so the need for a national consensus.

Obviously, in the short span of a media-meet, the Prime Minister could not, rather did not answer a few relevant questions, like “Why has financing political parties become a major source of generation of black income?”, or “Why cannot any single party say that it can deal with the problem by itself?”, “Doesn’t the malady then lie in the system itself?”, “How will the Prime Minister propose to rout it from the system?”. We bring in this note for a brief discussion on these questions that the Prime Minister has left unanswered. Incidentally the remarks came in the wake of the Chief Election Commissioner T. S. Krishna Murthy suggesting a comprehensive case for electoral reforms, in his July 5, 2004 letter to the Prime Minister. Even the issue of state funding was nothing new.

In June 1998, the BJP-led NDA Government constituted a multi-party parliamentary committee under the chairmanship of Indrajit Gupta of CPI to look into the question of state funding of elections. The other members of the committee were from CPI(M), Congress(I), BJP, Shiv Sena, AIADMK and Samata Party. The committee recommended partial state funding of only the recognized national or State political parties and their candidates in elections. It further indicated that the ultimate aim should be that all legitimate expenses of political parties are funded by the state. It virtually amounted to the fact that the committee members who made the recommendations were themselves the beneficiaries. (Frontline, February 13-26,1999)

Avowedly the aim of state funding was to discourage political parties from seeking any external funding from private contributors (except a nominal membership fee) to run their affairs, carry out political programmes and conduct election campaigns. As recommended by the committee, funding would include allotment of rent-free accommodation for the headquarters of national parties in New Delhi and the same facility for every recognized State party in the respective state capitals; provision of rent-free telephones with a more-than-normal quota of free calls and other facilities at those premises as well as, and separately for, election campaigns; sufficient time-slot free of cost on Doordarshan and All India Radio; a specified quantity of petrol or diesel to run campaign vehicles and of paper to prepare election literature and voter identity slips and all such other sundries. It has further suggested creation of a separate Election Fund with an annual contribution of Rs.600 crores (at the rate of Rs.10 a voter, for the total electorate of about 60 crores) by the Centre and a matching amount contributed by all State governments together.

Obviously, such an elaborate recommendation of state funding of elections, in conjunction or not, with the electoral reforms suggested by the Election Commission, raises questions as to how far these would be able to act as remedy to the dismal state, the electioneering process has been brought down to, today. We propose to focus here on the state funding issue for a brief study, though we feel that we may need to take up discussions on other occasions to show how in the name of smoothening or developing election processes, the other reforms suggested will only pave way for hindering genuine representative force of people, the force that fight for them from taking part in parliamentary forum at all.

Here, we should submit first that the question of reforms has come up parallel to gradual deterioration of the electioneering process, virtually since independence and establishment of the capitalist rule in the country. The ruling capitalist class has always tried to use and control this means to their end. They thus wanted to ensure that such political forces be in power that will serve them the best and help maintain the prevailing capitalist rule. However, immediately after the independence, the Congress, the party in power as the then most trusted representative of the ruling class, enjoyed some popular support, rather in legacy of the independence struggle, which it had led. There was also a relatively free and fair character in democratic, including electioneering processes, though in a limited sense. But with time, and with serving the capitalists-monopolists, the Congress, or for that matter any and every bourgeois party or combination that rose to power later, became discredited and isolated from the people. Their commitment to democracy was also undermined. Free and fair election gradually became a far cry. Manipulation and fraud with voter’s lists, bogus voting, distribution of privileges, particularly to the poorer and illiterate section of the masses or contrarily influencing them under threat and intimidation, harping on casteism-communalism to gain easy support, awarding unwarranted favour to party of choice in print and other media, all this was gradually reducing elections to a farce. With more crisis of capitalism and concomitant more exploitation of the masses and consequently, more and more isolation of bourgeois petty-bourgeois parties from the people, the process went on to lower and lower depths. Rigging using administration and through capturing of polling booths, manipulation of ballot boxes or even during counting, assumed alarming proportions all over the country, not excluding the states run by the so-called lefts like CPI(M). This way the total electioneering process is thus mutilated and distorted, fast and increasingly. And in the manner it degraded, it has also become gradually virtually impossible for genuine representative of people to win an election battle and get elected to the legislative forum. The capitalist system thus takes to a technique of effectively disenfranchising common people, while offering them franchise and while chanting alluring slogans of democracy. The 14th Lok Sabha election of the last year was not just the latest, it represented the worst of its kind hitherto experienced by the people.

Electioneering has thus been simply an interplay of money, mafia and a major and influential section of the media, sponsored, steered and blessed by the monopolists-capitalists. It is anything other than a reflection of people’s opinion and participation. No serious political issues or questions concerning hard-pressed people’s life, are confronted and combated by any major party, be it Congress(I), BJP, or their like or even the so-called big lefts headed by CPI(M)-CPI. Rather, there is the rat race for power and the pelf associated with it. It involves any and every combination and alliances attempted. Once a foe becomes the closest ally. Once lieutenant, is thrown out as the deadliest enemy. Once denounced as fundamentalist, is greeted warmly in so-called secular party. Diehard criminals are made captain of the electioneering brigade. Mafia-dons that once acted as hirelings of bourgeois political parties, are found to have been promoted to the status of party-bosses. Media help in creating the hype, even if people remain passive onlooker. They dish out make-believe opinion polls, keeping in line with the monopoly house or combination they work for, though in most cases these prove bogus. In summary, the media trumpet for a system that is betraying itself as a moribund one.

But the most glaring is the flow of money, that goes on like anything. The high ceiling of Rs 25 lakh for each parliamentary seat looks paltry in the face of vulgar extravagance of candidates of one and all the parliamentary parties, national or regional. Mind that, spending by the party itself is kept beyond the purview of this ceiling, obviously leaving a loophole to circumvent the law, and a scope, as well, for black money to flood the electioneering process. Then again, in addition to the usual heads of expenses on campaign, which were already sky-high, there are liberal cash handouts to local musclemen, film or TV stars or ‘celebrities’ from other fields to stage crowd-pulling show business.

The question that comes up naturally in people’s mind, as it did during this last instance of election is : wherefrom this huge sum of money is coming and why , to be spent in such a bane exercise of electing this or that political party, all of which have proved their uselessness in giving people the minimum relief amidst the all-out crisis of this society. People know it from their daily experience, but are not always sure of the answer. They may have missed the irrefutable truth that it has become the order of the day in every capitalist country, big or small, the traditional like the USA or the upstart, emerging through counter revolution as in Russia. In these days of intense general crisis of capitalism, bourgeois parliamentary election faces the same degradation everywhere in these countries. Glaring examples are still living in memory from the last two presidential elections in the USA, the presently self-proclaimed champion of democracy.

In any case, ever since the early days of the bourgeois parliamentary system, the election itself has acted as a prop in the hands of the ruling capitalist class to chose parties or forces for governance; legislative forum has always been an appendage of the class rule. Yet, in the days when the parliamentary system was an upcoming force it could allow common people and the working class a relatively liberal democracy, including electioneering and could rely upon popular opinion to seek support for its class parties. But the more the system plunged into crisis, the more the parliamentary political parties had to take to anti-people measures with a view to serving the ruling capitalist class and maintaining its class rule. Thereby they only earned increasingly more and more wrath of the vast masses of common toiling people and thus was discredited to and isolated from them. In such a situation the ruling class could no longer take the risk of any free and fair election lest it might bring some such force into power that would stand by the people for their cause. In result, the semblance of parliamentary democracy, the electioneering has thus become, meant for only the people to consume. The soul concern of the ruling capitalists boils down only to ensuring some such party or alliance to power, from among those in the fray, that would help maintain the capitalist rule in the best possible way at a particular moment; the colour of the party, the jargon, any shady antecedents, nothing does matter; loyalty to the class rule, subservience to the ruling class are the only passwords. It is also now an open secret that the election contests among parliamentary parties largely reflect conflicts and contradictions among the interests of this or that combination of industrialists-monopolists who are locked in severe competition among themselves amidst the acute recession-ridden crisis of market. They thus look ahead towards grabbing power by any means to meet their ends, at least towards apportioning the administration and governance among themselves to secure their respective interests. However, in the final analysis they chose that force or party which will serve the aggregate interest of the class in the best possible manner and to the maximum extent possible in a given situation. The contestants, the parliamentary parties and their local or regional allies, too, scramble for governmental power and privilege. They face one hard task of hoodwinking people to draw at least the minimum support. So they pose as their saviour from the clutches of poverty, misery or the “terror”, the champions of democracy or of secularism or ‘cultural nationalism’ or any convenient sort, while at the bottom of their heart, they remain the subservient henchmen of the ruling class, the aspirants to rise as the obedient and efficient caretaker of the prevailing capitalist system.

This is what the election means in essence in one and all capitalist countries today. It no longer reflects people’s opinion by any stretch of imagination; it no longer carries the least of the ideal ‘of the people, for the people, by the people’ for which even the bourgeois statesmen once fought. Thus questions, that were already simmering, are about to come to the surface in mass mind: questions about the source and motive of this vulgar extravagance in electioneering that has reduced the vital political process of even the bourgeois society to a farce; questions if it should continue like this and for how long. After all, people realizes that the monopolists, the industrial houses that spend unlimited sums to have the parties of their choice in power, are never philanthropic. They invest their money to ensure their control and clutches over the process and its outcome; they make sure that only their henchmen are allured and finally returned to serve them. In return, they fetch what they have spent, in full or even more. And here lies the main concern for the people. The whole spending , the whole extravagance will be met with by fleecing the people further; the monopolists, the industrial houses will squeeze back their investment in one form or another. They know it well that they never lose much with any change; they keep on earning their whole lot of maximum profit; the government takes care to ensure it. It may be recalled here that in spite of all tall claims, no amount of law has been able to prevent black money, that runs a parallel economy itself. And now, in the bid of the ruling class to establish and exert its absolute control over the electioneering process, that black money plays havoc there. This is a compulsion the class faces for its survival ; so no redresses are possible from deceptive legal measures, as conceived in the state funding. Rather, the net effect of the proposed state funding would then be, the black money will continue to play its role; only added to it, the same political parties, that are themselves involved in the nefarious game of grabbing power by any and every means, will be allowed to carry on with their business, this time squandering with public money. At the same time, in the face of mounting resentment about this colossal wastage for which people has to bear the brunt, the ruling class tries to put up some show with a view to appeasing the questioning minds and covering the truth, the real cause of the problem as well.

One more point is relevant here. When the committee recommends state funding for recognized parties only , at the same time professing it would bring in ‘an element of equality’ to electoral contests, it smacks of sheer hypocrisy. Even in a bourgeois sense, equality is not perceived thus. It clearly means all candidates found eligible must be treated equally, even if they may represent a minority voice . In reality, the brand of ‘equality’ that the committee professed for, means debarring so-called unrecognized parties from contesting. In other words it is nothing but an attempt to maintain and sustain those political parties, who have the blessings of the ruling class as they serve them the best and weed out, at the same stroke, the voices, the forces, the parties that stand for people’s cause, and give exposure to the root of people’s misery, that refuse to play subservient to the exploiters, the rulers. It thus leaves the ground more open to those chosen few political parties with which the ruling class wishes to run its system of so-called parliamentary democracy, a two-party system of that, which the Indian capitalists are now bent upon to establish.

In this malicious move for state funding of elections, the role of CPI(M)-CPI is singularly striking. They go by their leftist placard and jargon. Yet not only did they extend their support to this move ; they are among the enthusiast important members of the committee which is given the charge of designing this move. The ruling class and their branded representative, BJP did not fail to recognize their worth and thus included them as accomplices in planning the whole design.

It is thus clear that the electioneering process of the bourgeois parliamentary system has rotten to the marrow. All the pretensions of fairness or of democratic norms are being ripped apart. Hence to eliminate fraud and farce in election, to preserve and give effect to even the barest minimum of democratic elements in electioneering processes, democratic–minded people, the toiling masses will have to rely on their own strength, their mighty mass-movements to these ends, which can create and exert pressure on the power that be. They need to realize that no alleviation of their suffering and plight is possible through election and mere change of governments. At the same time there remains no other way left to the people to put an effective brake, if any, to the unbridled inflow of black money leading to vulgar extravagance in the electioneering process. Neither there is any alternative to such a movement to make the voice of people’s genuine representative heard in the parliamentary system, that is increasingly turning deaf and dumb to the misery and plight of common people of the land. Our party SUCI will always pledge to initiate and keep on with any such effort to stand by people’s cause.