Inaugural Session
Opening Remarks
Arun Bharat Ram
The CII was privileged to partner the NED in organizing a major international conference to set up the World Movement for Democracy. A welcome fallout of this has been the setting up of the Asian Center for Democratic Governance. This inaugural conference of the Center is therefore very special and of great significance.
Why? The answer to this question lies in the fact that economies will only flourish on a sustained basis when all sections of society reap the benefits of growth and development. Only those nations where there is equity amongst all sections of society, freedom of speech and action, and a premium on individual initiative, can provide the basis for sustained and, indeed, happy growth. After all, what is the use of progress if the benefits go only to a small minority?
Governance is the key to an open, transparent and equitable society. We in business and industry, as indeed every citizen, would like to see even greater transparency in every facet of governance. It is in this spirit we have joined hands with NED to provide a platform for sharing experiences amongst different nations, some of which have both an open economy and strong democratic norms. We have speakers and participants from 14 countries to deliberate today and tomorrow over various facets of governance, covering transparency and accountability, the role of parliament, the judiciary and the role of the media.
In an area where inter-dependence is the order of the day and where physical boundaries are becoming less and less relevant, democratic norms and good governance act as the major attraction for investment and business. Good governance provides a 'feel-good' factor to investors and business partners. Strong accountability enhances the confidence of the citizens and the consumers. It is in this context that we in CII and NED have organized this two-day meeting.
...Democratic norms and good governance act as the major attraction for investment and business. Good governance provides a 'feel-good' factor to investors and business partners.
Carl Gershman
This is the second major initiative that the National Endowment for Democracy and the Confederation of Indian Industry have taken together. The first was the founding assembly almost 2 years ago of the World Movement for Democracy which just held its second world assembly in Sao Paulo, Brazil, and we look forward to the continued participation of Indian NGOs, business and political leaders, trade unionists and intellectuals, and human rights defenders in this important global movement.
We are now gathered to establish a Center for Democratic Governance in Asia, which President Clinton announced during his state visit to India last March. Never has such an initiative been more timely or more urgently needed. A lead editorial in this week's Economist is entitled: "Asia's Teetering Trio," the subtitle read: "Indonesia, Thailand and the Philippines face a testing 2001," and indeed they do.
In each of these three important Asian countries, democracy has at best shallow roots and is by no means secure, and the year ahead will be difficult indeed. In Indonesia, long pent-up demands for decentralization have fueled some half a dozen separatist rebellions, at a time when foreign and domestic investment has collapsed and the military has yet to disengage from national politics. In Thailand, the new prime minister could be banned from national politics for five years for violating the country's new anti-corruption law. The Philippines is also in turmoil, as the impeachment trial of President Estrada proceeds, amidst bombings and growing economic disarray.
That is the bad news. The good news is that, so far, these new democracies are weathering the stormy seas. Democracy cannot become firmly rooted unless corruption is rooted out, and that will require mechanisms of ensuring transparency and accountability, and a long struggle to make these mechanisms effective. Of course there are many other challenges, including establishing stable party systems, dealing with the problems associated with money and politics, reducing the role of the military in politics, achieving economic reform and growth that can help lift people out of poverty, strengthening local government and other forms of decentralization, defending human rights, encouraging the growth of civil society, strengthening independent media, broadening the participation of women and the excluded minorities in all aspects of the political, economic and social life of society.
The list could go on. We have a long agenda because the work of building and rooting democracy involves so much more than simply ensuring free and fair elections. It is not that long ago when the collapse of weak democracies, such as in Weimar Germany, brought the rise of terrible dictatorships and destructive wars.
Today we can be more hopeful but never complacent. It is democracy that is moving forward, and dictatorship that is trying desperately to hold on by adjusting to the demands of modern life. In an article in today's International Herald Tribune on Asian democracy, an analyst from Thailand refers to the possibility of Vietnam becoming one of the 'new dominoes of democracy', thereby standing on its head the old Cold War theory that saw a Communist take-over in Vietnam precipitating similar advances throughout Asia.
The great strength of democracy, even weak democracy, was noted by Amartya Sen in his keynote address to the founding assembly of the World Movement for Democracy, held here two years ago. It gives people in need a voice, he said, and by so doing plays a protective role against so many different forms of political and economic abuse. This explains, according to Sen, why famines have never occurred in an independent and democratic country with a free press. In that regard, one can only note with sadness and a sense of urgency, that the military regime in Burma is not only doing nothing to avert a growing health crisis, but even refuses to acknowledge an AIDS epidemic, which is now the worst in Asia.
So, there is great need for this new Asian Center for Democratic Governance, which will help new democracies develop ways to make democracy work for people at the grass roots, and which can even look forward to a time when countries that are now autocratic will join the ranks of the new democracies and participate in the historic work of democratic consolidation.
The role of India in this process cannot be over-estimated. It is the world's largest democracy. It has grappled with all of the problems that confront the new democracies, from poverty and economic reform, to the immensely difficult issues of pluralism and minority rights, from conducting the most complex elections in the world, to bringing democracy to the local levels through the panchayat system, and it has managed to do this, decade after decade, in an international environment that has never been without tension and security concerns. As democracy goes through the difficult pains of birth and growth in so many different parts of Asia, the readiness of India to reach out and cooperate with emerging democracies becomes increasingly important for the future of the whole region, and indeed the whole world. It is in that spirit that I welcome the launching of the new Asian Center for Democratic Governance, and look forward to its development into an influential new instrument for strengthening our common democratic values.
Inaugural Address
Najma Heptulla
I preside over the Inter Parliamentary Union (IPU) with 140 member countries and I feel really proud to be associated with the democracies of the world, new democracies, emerging democracies, established democracies. We in India follow a system of democracy based on the British House of Commons, the 'mother of parliaments'. But India is a very peculiar country, an example on its own, with so much diversity of caste, religion, language, cultures, and ethnic groups. To have democracy in this country was not only the correct decision, nothing else could work in this country. It is only democracy, and the kind of democracy that we have adopted - inclusive, participatory and interactive - that can work.
There are democracies and democracies. There cannot be any blanket definition for democracies. Every country's needs, and social and political conditions, are different. If it is an elected democracy, which has a parliament that oversees the working of a government and has the authority to legislate, we accept it as a member of the IPU.
Transparency and accountability are essential for democratic governance. In the Indian parliament, the proceedings, each and every word said, is open to scrutiny. Nothing is hidden. When an MP puts a question, the ministers are bound to answer it, and they are accountable to parliament. Indeed, at the Cairo Conference of the IPU, we adopted the Universal Declaration of Democracy, in which we emphasized that it is an essential pre-requisite of democracy that there should be transparency and a right to information and accountability.
The democratic system is the best, as long as all parts work. The parliament works, the legislature works, there is an independent judiciary, and the bureaucracy works independent of everybody. But each is accountable to each other. We, as MPs, are accountable to the people, because if we are not doing our duty, we are surely going to get rejected, and the executive is accountable to parliament, and we all are accountable and answerable to the judiciary.
Another important factor has entered our system: the media. Today, the print and electronic media are very interactive. Most parliaments in the world are televised nationally, some internationally also. Nothing is hidden from the people, who see how their parliaments and MPs are working, and not only on the floor of the parliament. There are also programs where MPs are put on the mat by people on live telecast, and they have to answer questions in front of the media.
Then there are various parliamentary committees such as the Public Accounts Committee and the Public Undertakings Committee. We established, originally, 17 committees of both the houses of parliament and, since 1997, we added one more, the Empowerment Committee for Women, to look after the money allocated for women's programs. These committees work in camera because if you are working in public, MPs tend to speak to the galleries, saying what they want printed in newspapers or on television. But when they are working in camera in committees, they can speak freely. The reports are not secret. All are placed on the table of the house and are open for the public to study.
Another important point is the computerization of parliaments. When I chaired the Committee for Computerization of the Rajya Sabha (Upper House) three years ago, I insisted that all 244 MPs be provided with laptop or desktop computers, and an email address. In the beginning, there was some resistance, with some saying it was a waste of money. But I must tell you with pride that most MPs are now using email to communicate with the secretariat, and interact with people. All house proceedings are on the internet. If you visit the parliament website, you will see what is happening and you can even put in questions.
It is our duty to strengthen democracy. We must not allow democracy to fail, as happened in Fiji, Pakistan, and Burma. In Indonesia, they created a multi-party democracy in September 1999. I was invited, after the new multi-party election, to a UNDP workshop there, to build democratic capacities. In spite of all the happenings in East Timor and other places, I insisted we should go, to show confidence in the new system. Last September, 2,000 MPs and delegates arrived in Jakarta and we had an excellent conference, focusing on the issue of the military and other coups which abolish democracies and democratically-elected governments.
A current proposed reform in India is to give 33 per cent reservation to women at the panchayat, district and local bodies. After initial reservations, the bill was passed unanimously, and today one million women are elected at grassroots levels. Now there is a demand for women parliamentarians to have 33 per cent representation in parliament, either through their political parties or by reservation of seats, or by having 'dual constituencies'.
Representation from different groups and sections of the society will improve equity. I feel if there are more women in politics, there will be more transparency and accountability, because we have seen that wherever women are, in any position, they take their jobs seriously, because they have to prove themselves twice as much as men do.
The world needs to strengthen democracies wherever they are, and to have democracies where they are not, and we must make ourselves more transparent and more accountable to the people.
I feel if there are more women in politics, there will be more transparency and accountability, because we have seen that wherever women are, in any position, they take their jobs seriously, because they have to prove themselves twice as much as men do.
Discussion
- Women are not begging for reserved seats in parliament, nor do they want to merely 'tag along'. But in countries like India, where political parties have failed to build up the capacity of women representatives, and have not paved the way for fair gender representation, it is a necessary step.
- Parliamentarians in India would benefit from having their own trained professional staff to help them collect information and prepare to interact with, and question, bureaucrats and experts in their daily work, though Indian parliamentary committee staff were reported to be 'extremely helpful and to ask probing questions'.
- The funding arrangements for political parties in democracies must be made transparent. In India, for example, the limit per candidate used to be 50,000 rupees (about $1,000), but now stands at 1.5 million rupees (about $33,330) - although candidates spend far more than that. Full disclosure of donations made by corporations to political parties would help, but it is unlikely that companies will be willing to be so open about their donations.
- The importance of civil society bodies acting as a brake on the role of parliament has been neglected. Civil society bodies can impose accountability and should be fully involved. There should be more interaction between parliament and civil society bodies.
|
