YOUNG INDIA- SUCCESSFUL INDIA
Have we ever thought about it, as to what are our politicians actually doing for our nation with their preset ideas and notions. Our country yet seems to be running on the same pace as it was years ago. What politicians said yesterday, apply it even today. But in changing times, do the yesteryears rules and principals seem to make any difference. Not at all!
The younger generation brings in fresh ideas, fresh perspectives by looking at things from newer angles.
What’s common between Kerala’s Chief Minister, Mr V. S. Achutanandan, and the Union Minority Affair’s Minister, Mr A. R. Antulay? Both the politicians created embarrassment for their parties and the common ailment that afflicts them is their age and long stay in politics.
Doesn’t age matter in a political scenario like our? It indeed does!
India is the only democracy where there is a stark contrast between the average age profile of the citizens and that of politicians at the helm. While 70 per cent of India’s population is below 40 years of age, 80 per cent of India’s politicians are over 70 years.
Senior politicians in different parties have acquired larger-than-life images, simply because of their length of stay and not for any sacrifices made by them. For fear of losing power, such politicians never allow their junior colleagues to take centre-stage in their own organizations and governments.
Our Constitution makers, guided by the fact that there is no age limit in the Westminster model and did not prescribe an age limit for politicians to hold office. However, by convention all mature democracies have assiduously promoted younger leaders, generally in their early to late forties, in preference to older politicians.
The future of young free developed India is dependent on the ideas and thoughts of the youthful leaders and not on the aging experience of the politicians of yesterday. Inorder to prove to the world that India is a successful developed country it has to rely on innovative and futuristic ideas of the youthful netas and not the stagnant and practiced policies of the leaders of the past.
Tony Blair was just 43 when he assumed the office of prime minister in 1997 and Bill Clinton was just 46 when he was elected president of the US in 1992.
These two examples are not exceptions to the rule, but rather the general norm in the West. The US President, Mr Barack Obama, is just 47 and one of the reasons voters elected him is because his rival McCain, at 72, was considered too old for office.
Not withstanding public disdain for older politicians, established parties are generally in no mood to select younger people to run for office which is indeed an obstruction to future success.
Age has had its virtues. Does a politician ever retire? There is the social argument of making way for another generation. But all of this only makes the case stronger for the need to have a retirement age for politicians too.
The younger the leaders are, in fact, at the mercy of their seniors, for being given any responsibility cannot raise their voice against them, even when they may personally endorse the public mood. There is however, a case for fixing the retirement age for occupying party posts and constitutional positions.
First, a person’s ability to judge and respond quickly degenerates with age. There is also the overall lack of fitness, higher prevalence of serious diseases relating to heart, kidney, lungs, brain, and so on. In the Indian context, older leaders carry two serious disadvantages.
Leaders, over the years, become more and more greedy and second, they carry a lot of baggage. Greed among Indians is in their DNA, right from the Mahabharata days. Duryodhana preferred fighting a Mahabharata war to parting with just five villages demanded by the Pandavas.
Greed among Indian politicians now manifests in many forms: an octogenarian leader in Haryana starts an entirely family-based party; an ex-Prime Minister remains active only to ensure that his two sons are chief ministers and important position holders in whichever party and government.
Cognitive ability tends to decline as we age. While it's true that our ministers are surrounded by advisers, there's no doubt that a leader at the forefront of the global political stage needs to possess intelligence, logic and the ability to reason, all of which are affected by age.
In fact, a new race has started within this family to grab public office by his two daughters-in-law. Another nonagenarian leader in the South wants all his children to occupy important public or party offices and for achieving such an objective, he is ready to break the party, which he has done on several occasions.
The situation is even worse, in some of the regional parties, which are tightly controlled by the families at the helm. Memberships of the legislature can be grabbed easily by the patriarch’s children and the real fight is then for ministerial berths in the coalition governments. Time for change
The older leaders choke fresh ideas and from election to election carry the same agenda at heart. This has created a huge gap between what the younger generation wants and what older politicians can deliver.
A certain science has proved that our ability to acquire new knowledge declines partly because of a decline in most basic memory functions. Our memory, too tends to lessen down with age. Hence this is another essential disadvantage of having aged politicians. As you age, it becomes increasingly difficult to remember things unless you make a concerted effort. Younger politicians have fresh memories and work proactively with alert minds with the know-how of everything happening in and around their nation.
The biggest problem is for the political parties themselves. All major parties are facing serious problems with senior politicians and do not know how to get rid of them, since they refuse to leave active politics. They keep fighting for pelf and power, mostly for their children and other family members till the last.
Why then do we have a retirement age in the private or public sectors, even in the Judiciary, but have no age limit otherwise for Cabinet members or members of the House or Governor or Mayor?
A time has come to change the rules of the game in Indian politics for an emerging India, aspiring to become part of the developed world. Indian politicians need to be generous and they should look at role models elsewhere.
The young leaders would be frivolous and the old outdated. We need to have respect for both the exuberance of the youth and the freshness of its perspective on the one hand, the wisdom of the old, on the other. The older wise leaders must pave ways for the younger generation leaders to hold seats in the political scenario and instead of hinderance prove to be a spectacular guidance.
Our older leaders should be guided by people such as Nelson Mandela, who voluntarily demitted office of the President in South Africa. He could have easily remained President for life, but instead chose Thabo Mbeki to succeed him.
In the US, the 13th Constitutional amendment set term limits for the offices of the President and governors. This ensures that the leaders are not for life and the same leaders are not hanging around, whenever the party comes back to power. In the UK and other parts of Europe (except Italy), well established conventions have ensured that the defeated leaders do not come back in the next elections. Ditto for Australia, New Zealand and Canada, where sometimes leaders in the leading parties have come and gone at such speed that it is difficult to even remember their names.
Hindu philosophy divides human life span into four t ime periods. A 75-year-old, in his Vanprastha period (last stage) belongs to no one and is expected to devote himself entirely to serving the society. But that rarely happens in Indian politics. A case for age bar Thus, there is a serious case for the age bar for public offices. But the most important question is who is going to do it. It is unlikely that the Government on its own will introduce an amendment to the Constitution to fix age limits for various offices.
Should the Election Commission take the initiative for amending the relevant provisions for fixing age limits for the party office bearers of recognized parties?
The maximum age limit for holding any office in the party should not be more than 75 years. This will be possible, if simultaneously, there is another amendment for term limits for holding various positions within the parties.
No person should hold office within the party organization for more than 6-7 years. This will ensure that younger elements within the party get a chance and there is infusion of fresh ideas within the organization.
What we want in India is new and different ideas to make the country successful and vibrant. In normal circumstances people usually get habituated to a particular way of philosophy, judgment and assessment as he or she reaches towards grey age. To bring the vivacity and liveliness in the environment we do require the vitality factor which can come from a youthful perspective. Hence age does matter.
The other issue of fixing age limits for offices in the Government could also be taken up before the Supreme Court, which through interpretation of the relevant Constitutional provisions within the framework of equality before law guaranteed under Article 14 of the Constitution could set age limits. A petition before the apex court is worth trying.
If the Election Commission and Supreme Court could initiate measures on the suggested lines, peoples’ faith in the political process would be restored and the larger public demand to have younger leaders at the helm of affairs may fructify. (The author is a practising advocate and President of an NGO, Innovative Radical Reforms Organisation.
Indian politics favors seniority. Even if young politicians get elected they do not get the right to make important decisions. Indin politicians need to realize that governing a country is not just about experience, its also about fresh ideas, enthusiasm and young energy.
Fresh realistic young leaders are an important need of the hour for actual progress of the country. The attitude of the main political parties towards fresh talent has been largely apathetic.
The old need to pave way for the young and energetic. The youth of today can make India a far better place to live irrespective of the population, cultures and religions.
People need to be enlightened to advocate strongly the urge for younger politicians.
Have we ever thought about it, as to what are our politicians actually doing for our nation with their preset ideas and notions. Our country yet seems to be running on the same pace as it was years ago. What politicians said yesterday, apply it even today. But in changing times, do the yesteryears rules and principals seem to make any difference. Not at all!
The younger generation brings in fresh ideas, fresh perspectives by looking at things from newer angles.
What’s common between Kerala’s Chief Minister, Mr V. S. Achutanandan, and the Union Minority Affair’s Minister, Mr A. R. Antulay? Both the politicians created embarrassment for their parties and the common ailment that afflicts them is their age and long stay in politics.
Doesn’t age matter in a political scenario like our? It indeed does!
India is the only democracy where there is a stark contrast between the average age profile of the citizens and that of politicians at the helm. While 70 per cent of India’s population is below 40 years of age, 80 per cent of India’s politicians are over 70 years.
Senior politicians in different parties have acquired larger-than-life images, simply because of their length of stay and not for any sacrifices made by them. For fear of losing power, such politicians never allow their junior colleagues to take centre-stage in their own organizations and governments.
Our Constitution makers, guided by the fact that there is no age limit in the Westminster model and did not prescribe an age limit for politicians to hold office. However, by convention all mature democracies have assiduously promoted younger leaders, generally in their early to late forties, in preference to older politicians.
The future of young free developed India is dependent on the ideas and thoughts of the youthful leaders and not on the aging experience of the politicians of yesterday. Inorder to prove to the world that India is a successful developed country it has to rely on innovative and futuristic ideas of the youthful netas and not the stagnant and practiced policies of the leaders of the past.
Tony Blair was just 43 when he assumed the office of prime minister in 1997 and Bill Clinton was just 46 when he was elected president of the US in 1992.
These two examples are not exceptions to the rule, but rather the general norm in the West. The US President, Mr Barack Obama, is just 47 and one of the reasons voters elected him is because his rival McCain, at 72, was considered too old for office.
Not withstanding public disdain for older politicians, established parties are generally in no mood to select younger people to run for office which is indeed an obstruction to future success.
Age has had its virtues. Does a politician ever retire? There is the social argument of making way for another generation. But all of this only makes the case stronger for the need to have a retirement age for politicians too.
The younger the leaders are, in fact, at the mercy of their seniors, for being given any responsibility cannot raise their voice against them, even when they may personally endorse the public mood. There is however, a case for fixing the retirement age for occupying party posts and constitutional positions.
First, a person’s ability to judge and respond quickly degenerates with age. There is also the overall lack of fitness, higher prevalence of serious diseases relating to heart, kidney, lungs, brain, and so on. In the Indian context, older leaders carry two serious disadvantages.
Leaders, over the years, become more and more greedy and second, they carry a lot of baggage. Greed among Indians is in their DNA, right from the Mahabharata days. Duryodhana preferred fighting a Mahabharata war to parting with just five villages demanded by the Pandavas.
Greed among Indian politicians now manifests in many forms: an octogenarian leader in Haryana starts an entirely family-based party; an ex-Prime Minister remains active only to ensure that his two sons are chief ministers and important position holders in whichever party and government.
Cognitive ability tends to decline as we age. While it's true that our ministers are surrounded by advisers, there's no doubt that a leader at the forefront of the global political stage needs to possess intelligence, logic and the ability to reason, all of which are affected by age.
In fact, a new race has started within this family to grab public office by his two daughters-in-law. Another nonagenarian leader in the South wants all his children to occupy important public or party offices and for achieving such an objective, he is ready to break the party, which he has done on several occasions.
The situation is even worse, in some of the regional parties, which are tightly controlled by the families at the helm. Memberships of the legislature can be grabbed easily by the patriarch’s children and the real fight is then for ministerial berths in the coalition governments. Time for change
The older leaders choke fresh ideas and from election to election carry the same agenda at heart. This has created a huge gap between what the younger generation wants and what older politicians can deliver.
A certain science has proved that our ability to acquire new knowledge declines partly because of a decline in most basic memory functions. Our memory, too tends to lessen down with age. Hence this is another essential disadvantage of having aged politicians. As you age, it becomes increasingly difficult to remember things unless you make a concerted effort. Younger politicians have fresh memories and work proactively with alert minds with the know-how of everything happening in and around their nation.
The biggest problem is for the political parties themselves. All major parties are facing serious problems with senior politicians and do not know how to get rid of them, since they refuse to leave active politics. They keep fighting for pelf and power, mostly for their children and other family members till the last.
Why then do we have a retirement age in the private or public sectors, even in the Judiciary, but have no age limit otherwise for Cabinet members or members of the House or Governor or Mayor?
A time has come to change the rules of the game in Indian politics for an emerging India, aspiring to become part of the developed world. Indian politicians need to be generous and they should look at role models elsewhere.
The young leaders would be frivolous and the old outdated. We need to have respect for both the exuberance of the youth and the freshness of its perspective on the one hand, the wisdom of the old, on the other. The older wise leaders must pave ways for the younger generation leaders to hold seats in the political scenario and instead of hinderance prove to be a spectacular guidance.
Our older leaders should be guided by people such as Nelson Mandela, who voluntarily demitted office of the President in South Africa. He could have easily remained President for life, but instead chose Thabo Mbeki to succeed him.
In the US, the 13th Constitutional amendment set term limits for the offices of the President and governors. This ensures that the leaders are not for life and the same leaders are not hanging around, whenever the party comes back to power. In the UK and other parts of Europe (except Italy), well established conventions have ensured that the defeated leaders do not come back in the next elections. Ditto for Australia, New Zealand and Canada, where sometimes leaders in the leading parties have come and gone at such speed that it is difficult to even remember their names.
Hindu philosophy divides human life span into four t ime periods. A 75-year-old, in his Vanprastha period (last stage) belongs to no one and is expected to devote himself entirely to serving the society. But that rarely happens in Indian politics. A case for age bar Thus, there is a serious case for the age bar for public offices. But the most important question is who is going to do it. It is unlikely that the Government on its own will introduce an amendment to the Constitution to fix age limits for various offices.
Should the Election Commission take the initiative for amending the relevant provisions for fixing age limits for the party office bearers of recognized parties?
The maximum age limit for holding any office in the party should not be more than 75 years. This will be possible, if simultaneously, there is another amendment for term limits for holding various positions within the parties.
No person should hold office within the party organization for more than 6-7 years. This will ensure that younger elements within the party get a chance and there is infusion of fresh ideas within the organization.
What we want in India is new and different ideas to make the country successful and vibrant. In normal circumstances people usually get habituated to a particular way of philosophy, judgment and assessment as he or she reaches towards grey age. To bring the vivacity and liveliness in the environment we do require the vitality factor which can come from a youthful perspective. Hence age does matter.
The other issue of fixing age limits for offices in the Government could also be taken up before the Supreme Court, which through interpretation of the relevant Constitutional provisions within the framework of equality before law guaranteed under Article 14 of the Constitution could set age limits. A petition before the apex court is worth trying.
If the Election Commission and Supreme Court could initiate measures on the suggested lines, peoples’ faith in the political process would be restored and the larger public demand to have younger leaders at the helm of affairs may fructify. (The author is a practising advocate and President of an NGO, Innovative Radical Reforms Organisation.
Indian politics favors seniority. Even if young politicians get elected they do not get the right to make important decisions. Indin politicians need to realize that governing a country is not just about experience, its also about fresh ideas, enthusiasm and young energy.
Fresh realistic young leaders are an important need of the hour for actual progress of the country. The attitude of the main political parties towards fresh talent has been largely apathetic.
The old need to pave way for the young and energetic. The youth of today can make India a far better place to live irrespective of the population, cultures and religions.
People need to be enlightened to advocate strongly the urge for younger politicians.
0 comments:
Post a Comment