Many think that Right To Recall over non-elected executive posts like Lokpal, Police Commissioners etc is – WRONG. When I ask WHY is it wrong - they (especially JanLokpal people) say - You 'can't' remove non-elected people. What does this 'can't' mean? Is it a 1) technical/legal 'can't' or 2) ethical problem or 3) logical issue? I don't get proper answer.
Still - I have explained the righteousness of this idea from all 3 angles.
Before discussing the justification of the concept – let me explain the concept shortly.
DO NOT READ THE JUSTIFICATION WITHOUT READING THE CONCEPT MENTIONED BELOW.
Clause 1 – Any Citizen Voter who wishes to be XYZ can visit collector’s office, prove his eligibility for the XYZ post by providing necessary documents and submitting fees/deposit required to apply for the post, if any. The Collector (or any clerk appointed by the Collector), after scrutinizing authenticity of the Citizen Voter and that of the documents, will scan the application and publish it on PM’s/CM's website or any particular website. The collector will give a printed receipt to the Citizen Voter which will have details of the request put up on the website and – a serial number as an id of that request.
Clause 2 – Any Citizen Voter can support/oppose the applications mentioned in Clause 1 by :
1) Visiting Collector’s/Talati’s office, proving authenticity though voter id etc and mentioning Yes/No for those applications for Rs 3/- (Re 1/- for BPL people)
2) Using mobile phone sms (one number registered per voter id), ATMs etc.
This support/oppose (i.e. Yes/No) can be changed whenever voter wants. Latest entry from that person/mobile number etc will be considered, previous ones will be cancelled. All these Yes/No will be displayed on the website. The Collector will declare total number of Yes/No for all such applications per month.
Clause 3 – This is NOT a REFERENDUM – i.e. - If 51% or more of total voters support a person (i.e. submit ‘Yes’ for that person’s request) for the post of XYZ – existing person occupying the post of XYZ MAY or MAY NOT resign. The PM / CM etc MAY or MAY NOT fire the existing person and MAY or MAY NOT appoint the person who has fetched 51% or more support.
For District level posts, voters considered will be of that particular district. Similarly for States.
XYZ means – All Gov Posts viz - PM, CM, MPs, MLAs, Ministers etc. And -Not just elected representatives – I support same procedure for Lokpal, Lokayukt, Supreme Court Judge, High Court Judge, Police Commissioners, IAS / IPS chief officials, Collectors etc. – And THIS is the topic of this article. Justifying RTR over Non-elected, executive posts.
- Logical – Simple – make these public servants ACCOUNTABLE to The Public. Right now, their loyalty remains anywhere but towards common citizens. If, LOGICALLY, it’s right to make elected representatives accountable (by implementing RTR over elected representatives) then LOGICALLY it’s right to make non-elected representatives accountable to public too. What if Lokpal forms consensus with Supreme Court Judges ? What if whole nation can see that Lokpal has indeed become corrupt - but is smart enough to leave no proofs admissible in Courts ? This is where we need the final power - To Remove and Replace them with Good Guys.
- Moral – What’s immoral in removing your servant and recruiting a better one? We do that everyday in our home (with domestic helpers) and in our offices (with employees). Please note that we are NOT PUNISHING anybody here “without convicting”. We are not sending anyone behind the bars or hanging someone till death. We are just replacing a bad/less good guy with good/better guy. That’s it. I don’t see anything immoral in this.
- Legal – Please read above 3 clauses – especially clause 3 – ALL THE CLAUSES are PERFECTLY LEGAL. You will understand that this is JUST AN OPINION GATHERING. All that I am saying is – Let The People EXPRESS whom they want ! Let them UNITE to support good and oppose bad – TRANSPARENTLY. Clause 3 clearly makes it clear that whether to listen to citizens or not is completely up to the authorities !
- Practical – There are several objections here.
- What about those who don’t have internet?
- What about impact of caste/religion on people’s choices?
- What if people are paid money to support/oppose proposals by corrupt/bad politicians?
Answer to 1st Q : What about those who don’t have internet?
– The Q itself is wrong. Whether you have internet or not doesn’t matter to submit a proposal or support/oppose it. You will have to visit Talati’s office for the same. Also, after above system is implemented the support/oppose mechanism can be made easier by allowing secured ways like sms (like mobile banking), ATMs etc.
Answer to 2nd Q : What about impact of caste/religion on people’s choices?
– Today caste/religion etc has some impact on Voting because people do not have a good and reliable way out. People do NOT vote to the ‘most favourite’ but to the ‘least hated’ alternative because they do not want ‘most hated’ to win. As people completely believe that “Sab ke sab chor hai” – they choose “ghar ka chor”. Even if they have a good alternative – there is a fear that “others” will not vote this good guy and hence the “most hated” might win – and hence vote goes to “least hated”. The above mentioned proposal solves this dilemma as the Opinion gathering is – TRANSPARENT. Everyone will see who is garnering support – slowly but steadily. The ACTIVISTS will be able to build consensus slowly.
Answer to 3rd Q : What if people are paid money to support/oppose proposals by corrupt/bad politicians?
– Please read third clause of the above proposal – “Any citizen voter can change his YES/NO any day by visiting Talati's office and paying Rs 3 for the same.” - This means if I pay you and other 1000 people Rs 100 to support my demand – you do so today – you can very well go tomorrow (or any day) and change your support to oppose. For how many days will I pay you and other 1000 people?
To ask more...please feel free to contact !