The lament of the Manipur Human Rights Commission, MHRC, is today bordering the pathetic. It will be recalled that when this commission was introduced, the then government had flaunted it as a feather in its cap. today, for whatever its wisdom, the government seems content to have it reduced to a mere vestigial organ – tolerable as long its does not cause it headache, but highly dispensable once it does become inconvenient. And yet, we are quite certain when the occasion does demand the government to strut its democratic credentials, it would be citing the existence of this commission as one of its chief alibis. Why just the MHRC, the strategy would practically be the same as regards any other so called democratically established autonomous statutory institutions in the state entrusted with the job of checking and balancing the ways of the government. To name just a few of these, there are the State Information Commission, formed as per requirement of the Right to Information, RTI, Act, the State Women’s Commission, another constitutional obligation towards women’s empowerment, the State Minorities Commission to look into the shortfalls of statutory benefits reaching the minority communities, and even the Manipur Public Service Commission. There are many more in the list, and all of them, without exception have been reduced to rubber stamps meant only to ensure democracy in form but hollow in substance. Many of them have been reduced to outposts to send away ruling party MLAs who did not manage a ministerial berth, and other party sycophants and powerbrokers to keep them from openly rebelling. So much for democracy in practice in the state!
Instead of wailing of step motherly treatment by the government, we wish the members of the current MHRC would muster the courage to say no more nonsense and step down, thus making a strong statement that they would not allow this extremely important democratic institution to be reduced to a farce. Salaries and perks of posts will come automatically once the commission acquires the status guaranteed by the constitution. Instead of whining for more pay, they must be able to invoke the law imaginatively so as to expose how the government is acting against constitutional will, and in the process going against the spirit of democracy as well. Without doubt, the MHRC is the flagship of all autonomous democratic institutions in the state and its members must live up to expectations and set the right example so the government is compelled to allow all other similar institutions to get to be the checks and balances they were meant to be, and so very vitally essential to keep any democracy healthy.
One is reminded of Fareed Zakaria’s stress on the indispensability of these checking and balancing systems. In “Future of Freedom” he points out how American democracy (which obviously he thinks is closest to ideal) introduced even undemocratic means to ensure democracy is on track. As for instance, the American Supreme Court judges are appointed for life (there cannot be a more undemocratic practice than this) as also the country’s Federal Reserve Chairman. The implication is, once appointed, the heads of these important institutions cannot even be bullied by the most powerful man on earth – the American President. Indeed, Nobel Prize winning economist and economic advisor to President Bill Clinton, Joseph E. Stiglitz in his book “The Roaring Nineties” points out jokingly how Alan Greenspan, the then Federal Reserve chairman (equivalent to the RBI Governor) was the man the President feared the most. Again in the American Congress, while representation in the House of the Representative is proportional to population (which is democratic), in the Upper House or Senate, the American constitution equates the powers of all its states (highly undemocratic in the conventional sense). Hence California with 36 million people and Arizona with just 4.7 million people would have only two representatives each in the Senate. This is not a case for mimicking the American model of democracy. This on the other hand is a plea for ensuring the health of statutory institutions autonomous of the government so that they can act as the foil as well as beacon to ensure our own practice of democracy remains healthy and vibrant.