Citizens, either as individuals or part of civil society groups, campaigns, movements etc. play an extraordinary role in governance. Sometimes, when the ‘politics’ gets too intense and draconian, these groups face a real threat of violence, arrests, false cases, or as seen in India, having one’s home pulled down by a JCB[1] in some morbid display of ‘bulldozer justice’.
Ironically, it is when voices are most suppressed that they must rise the loudest. Individuals and communities facing relentless and chronic targeting and oppression, can go through fatigue – a fatigue that comes out of being hurt or shocked by every day incidents of targeting or meanness, feelings of being abandoned by all that one used to trust – one’s friends, neighbours, colleagues, relatives, elected representatives, leaders and such– like a disease that does not get better, but only hurts you in more ways and more places, and spaces. True nationalism demands of those communities that are NOT the target of these systemic oppressions and discriminations, take up the onus of pushing back against the system.
Nationalism is not about being on the side of obvious discrimination and oppression and waiting eagerly for one’s share of the pie. When livelihoods are lost, homes are destroyed, people are killed, their religious spaces are vandalised, those who clap and jeer on the side-lines, convince themselves that they are the true ‘nationalists’ and that all that is being done in their names is for some larger good. Such people are, in fact, nothing more than cruel and complicit accomplices.
Citizens as scrupulous watchdogs
It is up to us as individuals and communities to decide whether the Constitution of our country is a living document that we uphold, however inconvenient or nothing more than a piece of paper. There should be a very narrow gap between what the Constitution says, and what each of us practice as individuals and communities. Certain aspects or lines even about the Constitution can become tools to rationalise one or the other morally wrong act, but we cannot use that to do away with the spirit of our Constitution which is undeniably fraternity, justice and equality. When the pillars of democracy are crumbling before our very eyes, we become the crucial pillar that upholds the value and morality of all these other pillars. If enough people criticise the media for their wilful polarisation, if we refused to elect people who were abusive and violent liars, if we refused to accept judgements that were patently flawed, we hold all these institutions to account. The more we push for their accountability, the stronger all these structures will be. Instead, if we allow crimes and mistakes only because the perpetrators belong to our own caste, religion or region, we do a great disservice to the country and are the real ‘anti-nationals’. Unfortunately, the mainstream media, instead of uplifting the concerns and voices of citizens, is ideologically biased in favour of power.
As with the Right to Food Act (2013), the National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (NREGA), the Right to Information (RTI) Act, and several other government decisions, it was the relentless persistence of civil society that made these changes see the light of day. Attempts are constantly underway to undermine these Acts and make them toothless, therefore vigilance has to be continuous. One cannot sit back and say that victory was achieved and that it is time to relax. As citizens, we need to be constantly watchful and vigilant.
Citizens must distance themselves from political parties
Civil society may choose to support one political party or the other for election promises that they hope will be beneficial. However, this does not mean that civil society should become uncritical allies or ardent supporters or one or the other party. That would be disastrous, making us nothing more than party workers. We need to hold parties accountable, and for that, we need to be informed, concerned and moral. Political parties have the capacities to co-opt leaders, influencers and civil society movements.
The role of the civil society is to be firm, with the agenda of welfare or development, faithful to the rule of law and not act according to convenience or political gains. It cannot adopt a selective approach when it comes to demanding accountability from the government, irrespective of the party in power. No party should be given scope for compromise or dereliction of Constitutional responsibilities. This is a very serious and delicate distinction that every responsible citizen and civil society organisations must make today.
The credibility of civil society organisation and clarity of the objectives and ideology matters. Everything cannot be tolerated in the name of choosing the lesser evil all the time. The ‘lesser evil’ should also be made equally accountable. Hence the message from the civil society should be consistent and not opportunistic. Rule of law, Constitutional values and due process should be our base rather than becoming victims or allies of opportunistic political games, partisan politics, selective application, and reducing everything to the matter of convenience or personal gain. There are individuals who join parties in the hope of bringing about social change, but can become silenced by party ideology.
Shifting loyalties from political parties to the Constitution.
The duty of the citizen is to abide by the Constitution and respect its ideals and institutions, and to promote harmony and the spirit of common brotherhood amongst all the people of India transcending religious, linguistic and regional or sectional diversities; to renounce practices derogatory to the dignity of women. Sadly it is the government that is violating these very duties.
When India achieved independence from foreign rule, the people became the sovereign masters of the country. It was “we, the people of India” who gave unto themselves a constitution and provided in its space for the legislative, executive and judicial systems to function. As much as the Constitution is the creation of the people, the basic constitutional values embodied in the Preamble, the fundamental rights and The Directive Principles of State Policy represent citizenship values. The role of the citizens is not to be seen as mere taxpayers but as active participants evolving policies and plans and in monitoring performance of the government. Citizen governance is meant to translate the concept of sovereignty of the people into a reality. The government is seen as an equal partner with the citizens.
The 73rd and the 74th amendments to the Constitution of India are meant to bring in place citizen governance in the rural and urban areas through the involvement of the citizens in the vital areas of governance, economic development and welfare. The purpose of these amendments is to ensure civic engagement towards effective, efficient, transparent and accountable government.
The concept of Citizen Governance Democracies is weak without citizen governance. Citizen governance is value based and thus must be construed within civil society organisations and leaders should examine their own political context and vision for change. Unless the government is open to listen to the citizen groups and involve them in the governance process no tangible benefits will flow to the society from citizen governance. The three elements of the governance model are citizen engagement, performance measurement and government policy and implementation.
Citizen engagement refers to the involvement of citizens, using the term “citizens” in the broadest sense to include individuals, groups, non-profit organisations and even business corporate citizens. Citizen engagement in a community is best when it is broad, inclusive and representative of citizens.
Citizens as spokespersons for the vulnerable
The gaze of the citizen should be clearly focused on the welfare of ALL individuals, more so the most vulnerable and distributive social justice being central. A citizen is someone who has a legal right to participate in the affairs of the state. A citizen who does not meet these responsibilities of holding the state accountable, becomes part of the problem and socially disruptive.
Instead of caste, religion, region, class etc. defining our allegiances, can we rather place it on the Constitution or a sense of justice and morality? Can we look at actions of the government or our communities through these lenses rather than through hatred and othering? Creating ‘others’ helps to break down the cohesiveness of a community. Someone we went to school with, who was from our neighbourhood, who participated with us in activities, is suddenly viewed with suspicion as someone who can steal our women or our homes, our jobs, our rights. Whether this is true or not, our imagination accepts it because we are bombarded every day with messages of hatred and ‘othering’. If all of us break into cliques and silos, fighting with everyone else, the ones who gain are those in power, the elected representatives, the so-called religious leaders, the business community. For those who keep fighting, there are losses on multiple fronts, some more than the others and some more tangible than others.
Active citizenship is when we work to ensure a better life for all in our community, leaving no one behind. As we saw with Covid-19, irrespective of whatever fancy apartments we lived in, if there are pockets of overcrowding then the entire area is at risk of spread of disease. The solution then is not to forcibly evacuate communities, as we often do in our ‘smart cities’, but to ensure affordable housing to all that also makes sound public health sense. Further citizenship should be based on pluralism, respect for dignity and rule of law.
If we are okay with some of our citizens being beaten, bullied, harassed and discriminated against, it will not be long before these behaviours seep into our own lives too. The principles of non-discrimination are of value only when we uphold it for all citizens. This principle itself cannot be discriminatory.
Pushing individuals and communities to a state of having lesser rights, lesser participation and lesser dignity cannot be the way forward for India, but unless we are wary and watchful, this is exactly where we seem to be heading. When people have lesser access to justice, or livelihood or resources, freedom of expression, or economic development, it pulls the country’s entire indicators down. We cannot climb up as a society or country, unless we all climb up.
For instance, if the government wants to reduce spending on social security schemes that benefit the poor of the country, they can start spreading the narrative that some people are lazy and don’t want to work, that ‘freebies’ go to people who are well off and not really poor, that the well-off are being denied resources that should rightfully belong to them. Because of this narrative, an influential section of the population may turn against these schemes. They start believing that any government which does away with these schemes is an assertive government. In fact the people deprived may be those who are disadvantaged because of their caste, gender, physical ability, age, region, occupation, livelihood etc. When we support cutting down these schemes based on what we see on WhatsApp or political speeches, we do a disservice to our own fellow citizens. Further we teach our young people also these false narratives. Rather than astutely question political rhetoric, we become their biggest supporters.
Conclusion and way forward
Our role as citizens is not limited to elections alone. If our fellow citizens chose to protest about one or the other issue, we should stop seeing this as an act of disobedience or wilfulness. Protests help overcome inequalities, ensure safety of public spaces, protect the vulnerable, demand accountability. Even if we do not agree with the reason, we have to unflinchingly support people’s right to protest, just as we should oppose political bullies who prevent people from exercising their voting rights.
Indian citizens really need to take a call about whether we want to at the lowest rung of participation as citizens where we are more likely to respond to misinformation, whipping up sentiments and manipulation than being at the highest rung as rational, informed, moral citizens.
The government of India says that its citizens are one of the dominant pillars of the country. However, this same government is constantly attacking all the pillars that hold the democracy of the country. Further the government says that the state or country should provide its citizens with fundamental civil rights such as personal rights, religious rights, social rights, moral rights, economic rights, and political rights, etc. A right is a liberty that is protected by the state, such as the right to free speech and religion. Ironically, it is this same government that is hammering away at these very same rights every day. Let us not become mute spectators but active and observant and questioning citizens.
(The author is the Director of St. Joseph’s College of Law, Bengaluru)
[1] Company manufacturing excavators and diggers.
Related:
Diverse Nation Needs Diverse Battles to Save it, Say Civil Society Activists
Citizens, civil society hold the ruling party, BJP to account: #ReportCard Karnataka