Published in the Economic and Political Weekly A citizen is one who can hold public office, Aristotle From The Hindu On March 9th, a historic amendment to the President’s address was passed in the Rajya Sabha. The amendment was historic not just because it is one of the only five times in Parliamentary history that the President’s address has been amended by the Opposition in an act of censure to the Government but equally because of what the amendment sought to do. The amendment sought to force the Government to secure “the fundamental right of all citizens to contest elections at all levels, including to Panchayats to further deepen democracy, which is a basic structure of the Constitution and consistent with the spirit of the 73rd amendment […] without imposing educational or other limitations on the right to contest elections”. The amendment was in response to the decisions of the BJP-led Governments in Rajasthan and Haryana, to impose among other criteria such as working toilet in home, that all contestants for local body elections – Panchayat and municipal – have passed at least middle (8th) and secondary (10th) school. This stipulation debarred in one fell swoop more than 50% of the electorate from contesting elections with historically marginalized social groups – dalits, adivasis, women and the poor – disproportionately affected. It is notable that these are the very groups that the 73rd and 74th Constitutional amendment sought to include in participatory local governance through mandatory reservations. The statistics are worth highlighting: in Rajasthan, 75% of the rural electorate above the age of 20 years has not cleared middle school and are disqualified from contesting; 85% of SC women above 20 years of age have not passed primary school and cannot stand for elections. Similar numbers are disqualified by the Haryana law.
Right to Contest and Citizenship
Right to Contest and Citizenship
Right to Contest and Citizenship
Published in the Economic and Political Weekly A citizen is one who can hold public office, Aristotle From The Hindu On March 9th, a historic amendment to the President’s address was passed in the Rajya Sabha. The amendment was historic not just because it is one of the only five times in Parliamentary history that the President’s address has been amended by the Opposition in an act of censure to the Government but equally because of what the amendment sought to do. The amendment sought to force the Government to secure “the fundamental right of all citizens to contest elections at all levels, including to Panchayats to further deepen democracy, which is a basic structure of the Constitution and consistent with the spirit of the 73rd amendment […] without imposing educational or other limitations on the right to contest elections”. The amendment was in response to the decisions of the BJP-led Governments in Rajasthan and Haryana, to impose among other criteria such as working toilet in home, that all contestants for local body elections – Panchayat and municipal – have passed at least middle (8th) and secondary (10th) school. This stipulation debarred in one fell swoop more than 50% of the electorate from contesting elections with historically marginalized social groups – dalits, adivasis, women and the poor – disproportionately affected. It is notable that these are the very groups that the 73rd and 74th Constitutional amendment sought to include in participatory local governance through mandatory reservations. The statistics are worth highlighting: in Rajasthan, 75% of the rural electorate above the age of 20 years has not cleared middle school and are disqualified from contesting; 85% of SC women above 20 years of age have not passed primary school and cannot stand for elections. Similar numbers are disqualified by the Haryana law.