In 1948, in one of the last moves he made before his assassination, Mahatma Gandhi proposed the dissolution of the Congress as a political party and recommended its transformation into a social service organisation –the Lok Seva Sangh which would be devoted to the task of social regeneration and economic uplift through voluntary rural programmes. He wanted Congressmen to leave electoral politics, government and administration. Those interested in political power could leave the Lok Seva Sangh and join political parties or form them.
Gandhi Jiwrote in his diary of May 21, 1947 (quoted by H.V.Kamath in Parliament on May7,1962 : Lok Sabha Debates ,Third Series,Vol II, cc 2931-32) as follows:
“The Congress has gained the trust of the people on account of its many sacrifices and penances. But, if at this moment it were to let the people down by becoming their overlord instead of their servant and arrogate to itself a position of master, I venture to prophecy on the strength of my experience of long years that though I may be alive or not, a revolution will sweep over the country and that the people will pick out the white capped ones individually and finish them and that a third power will stand to gain by this”
The Congress not only stayed on in politics for the pursuit of power, it defined it. Amongst other things, its modus operandi included a brilliant management of power arithmetic through defections ever since the watershed election of 1967. If today its political opponents are beating it at the same game, the Congress cannot complain since its name is indelibly associated with the institutionalising of this practice .The phrase “Aya Ram, Gaya Ram” is the stuff of legend.
The politics of defection is a game of thrones. The Indian constitution doesn’t even recognize political parties. Yet, we have one of the most stringent anti –defection laws in force whereas it is interesting that none of the democracies in the West legally bar defections.
Defection amounts to transfer of loyalty. However, it is pertinent to note that the words defection and dissent have distinct meanings and one may not use them synonymously.
Political ‘Bossing’ can only survive with the support of vested interests and ‘status quo-ists’. The larger issue is not caste or group factionalism, polarisation or the lure of office. The underlying basic issue is the lack of ideological commitment.
The economist J.K. Galbraith once wrote, “Faced with a choice between changing one’s mind and proving there is no need to do so, almost everyone gets busy with the proof.” Moreover, truth and accuracy are not the only things that matter to the human mind. Humans also seem to have a deep desire to belong. This is true both for those who leave a formation and those who stay on.
The Harvard psychologist Steven Pinker has explained how the need for affiliation affects beliefs, “People are embraced or condemned according to their beliefs, so one function of the mind may be to hold beliefs that bring the belief-holder the greatest number of allies, protectors, or disciples, rather than beliefs that are most likely to be true.” Changing beliefs to feel secure in belongingness is understandable. False beliefs can be useful in a social sense, the facts be damned!
In a representative democracy, the primary loyalty of a representative is to the electorate. The very idea of incorporating provisions to enable defections implies a recognition of such a thing as free will and action. However, principled defections, as acts of conscience, are as rare as the sightings of the Yeti. Power is almost always seen to be the sought after prize. It is seen by the electorate as an immoral, opportunistic breach of faith. It negates the electoral outcome. The Constitution’s 52nd Amendment Act, 1985 and the 91stAmendment Act, 2003 -often referred to as the Anti-Defection Laws(s) – recognized that managing floor arithmetic is intrinsic to a democracy.
But, the anti-defection pesticide has failed to prevent the rot. It has merely changed the rules and increased the stakes. The continuing contempt for the electorate shows us that the numbers game in representative institutions is only for grabbing and holding on to power.
The politics of defection subverts the soul of constitutionalism. Yet, it is a reality.
As a democracy, we must deal with the virus and not leave it to the constitutional doctors to attend only to the patients.