news details |
|
|
| Parliamentarians and Society | | | Er. Jitender Kohli | 1/4/2012 12:12:57 AM |
| The democracy is controlled and run by the Parliament of the nation through the elected parliamentarians by the common voters. Each parliamentarian is liable to represent what the common people of that constituency need and desire. The elected leader, though, connected to the ideology of one or the other political party and to the manifesto presented to the nation for electorate heat to go through. The common people have no other choice than to vote for one of the contestants appearing in the list he is to stamp or push the machine button to select.
There is no choice to show his resentment against the contestants or competent to reject them compels him to elect any one of them, normally people are heard laughing at this process by telling that "let us stamp on who is lesser corrupt than others". Though it seem a joke heard while standing in the queue in wait to caste the vote but in fact this is inner voice of resentment of the people still remains unheard by the lawmakers. The Parliament house is a hub of the nation who holds and regulates democracy and the Parliamentarians are liable to serve the nation resultant in uplifting the society status. Practically entire powers of the nation are centered to the Parliament and parliamentarians. Though they are answerable to the nation, society and to the constituency they belong to but the troubling fact encountered by the nation is that to "whom they are answerable and who is to ask for their follies?" The ruling leaders very tautly and with pride say "You have elected us, don't cry now, you can show your unpleasantness after five years in next election if you can". This exposes his inner voice that the leader is not answerable to public between elections. The leaders have made the national inhabitants to bear them irrespective of his being good or bad. The parliamentarian in the house is connected to a particular political party bound to stand with its ideology and to obey what the high command directs that may suite to that constituency or not to which he belongs. The independent elected parliamentarians are also directly or indirectly emerge with one of the political parties; normally they go with the ruling group. This all creates lobby system dominated by the most powerful bunch of leaders. The political parties are raised by the most influential families in political arena converting these parties as their personal property keeping the workers as their bondage slave. The person elected with hard earned ticket from a party reaches in the Parliament house as to represent that political party as bondage of that party to only obey the high command of that party. This practically evident that the high command of any political party belongs to that family who raised it or who captured it. The most powerful is that family whose party enjoys the rule. The ruling political party goes for the parliament business by clubbing similar political parties at regional level. This bunch seems like one family governing at National level and others at state level protecting each other's interests. This all compels one to recall the historical facts that a family was holding a large kingdom as "Chakarvati Smraat" served by the Maharajas, Rajas, and Jagirdars and so on to the bottom level of smaller land segments. The present chain of governing system resembles to it. Practically what is wrong one thinks? The common people, immediately after independence trusted those leaders who were either from the rich classes or most fanatic religious heads.
The leaders like Mahatma Gandhi were also not listened to by the leaders who started enjoying the independence fruit without answerable to any one. Mahatma Gandhi had asked to disband the "Indian National Congress" immediate after the independence. He wanted to let the common Indians to reframe their political group from a village to the cities among whom the leading personalities shall be entrusted to manage the re-construction of the nation not as "India" but as "Bharat". It had a very good vision; he wanted to corner those who had become the most powerful leaders in the said congress to avoid their clash or cracks for lust of power suspecting damages to the nation. This was totally ignored and with the passage of time the Indian National Congress started disintegration. There are many Indian nation Congress groups among whom the Indian National Congress (I) is the most powerful. This is the group which managed to govern the national for the maximum period baring a couple of piecemeal years governed by other political parties. None of them was having only the high command in particular family to carry along the old monarchic system. This is why the Lokpal bill is being tossed in parliament for the last forty two years but the most shocking and disturbing is the behaviour of the parliamentarians on this subject. The government understands what people want. The rulers are aware of the pulse of the national society but they are capable of dodging the society being not answerable to any one. What the hell lets loose if the C.B.I. is made an independent body answerable to the parliament and the judiciary? Why it must remain tool of the government? Today UPA is having its control tomorrow it can be with NDA then what the position can be? Is UPA confident to rule for ever or the parliamentarians feel comfortable in letting the Lokpal bill hang as long as they succeed? The society has no other option than to bear the present atmosphere. The society repents in sending such parliamentarians who are not answerable for their acts even for their behaviour in the parliament house. Parliamentarians and Assembly members are many times seen throwing chairs, chappals, and abuses on each other, they are found using un-parliamentary language for Honourable Governors, President of India. Many of them found not attending the parliament session instead spend their time in the compagaining for their party for the coming elections or remain busy with some other assignments. Have their emoluments for the session deducted for their absent period? There are many evidences come in the light through the media that the Member of Parliament or Assembly continue to illegally occupy the government residences, have not made the rent or consumption bills and some have continue to live in their personal/ family residential building but spend the huge money of the public exchequer in renovating it to be worth of their choice and taste. There are media reports revealing handsome public exchequer spent on the protection of these leaders, their families and their children are protected with z-protection ring to school, picnic or other movements. The leaders claim to be of people, close to the people and are so close to intermingle with them, reaching them to remote villages, stay in their huts, share food and carry buckets at site of work, sharing their sorrows and are easy accessible to them. Then what makes them to have such protection, why inquiries are initiated for breach of security ring if one reaches close to his vehicles fleet? Why a person is lifted from his rally if he stands to ask a question or tries to tell him his personal agony? If their life is really endangered then their movements with the poorest among the poorest seems like a celluloid shooting to screen on the electronic media and to keep in archives to befool the coming generations keeping them away from the facts. The society wishes to see disciplined parliamentarian in the house who patiently listen each other, present national interest proposals, avoid blaming or cursing each other, never to ask other "how you can ask me for this folly which you have done in your rule period". The society seeks serious national business in the house and not the time pass tricks in the sessions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
STOCK UPDATE |
|
|
 |
| BSE
Sensex |
 |
| NSE
Nifty |
|
|
| |
CRICKET UPDATE |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
