-with only 16% vote share of Jharkhand’s population JMM-BJP-AJSU-JDU combine has formed the govt -
When Sibu Soren and his two deputies were sworn in on 30th December, the print and electronic media spoke of a ‘popular govt’ being formed. The question is: how popular is a popular govt? The following data offer some insights to point out that it is far from true:
Of Jharkhand’s population of 2 crore 70 lakh, the registered voter base is 1 crore 73 lakh. In the last Assembly election, only 95 lakh persons voted, a turn out of 55%. Of this the JMM-BJP-AJSU-JDU combine secured 46%, and of the total eligible voters 25%, and of the total population 16%. So 16% will rule over 100% of Jharkhand population!
A more detailed look: (a) of the 95 lakh votes cast . . .
|
Party |
votes in lakhs |
in % |
|
BJP |
20.74 |
21.83 |
|
JMM |
15.59 |
16.41 |
|
AJSU |
5.27 |
5.55 |
|
JDU |
2.83 |
3.00 |
|
TOTAL |
44.43 lakhs |
46.79 % |
(Source: Hindustan Times, 27-12-09, page 13)
(b) of the 1,73,00,000 eligible voters . . .
Ruling combine’s vote share: 44.43 lakhs works out to 25.68%
© of the Jharkhand’s 2,70,00,000 total population . . .
Ruling combine’s vote share: 44.43 lakhs works out to 16.45%
Is ‘majority’ only for seats? Several countries stipulate that the winner of a seat not only has to secure more votes than his rivals but also he should get at least 50% of the votes cast. If that rule were to be applied in our country, very few will get elected. We can safely assume that none of our politicians have been elected by the majority of the eligible electorate.
Money flowing like water: there was no accountability on the part of the candidates. The Election Commission did not pull up those parties and candidates who did not file their expenditure as per rule. The larger parties had plenty of money to throw around and they used their money to divide the tribals and put them against each other. The only benefit to the people at large was that hundreds of unemployed young men were temporarily employed by the candidates for their campaign work. Now if their candidate won the election, he has gone up the ladder and become MLAs, and a few of them even cabinet ministers. But those who campaigned for him for money will return to their original state of unemployment. For them, the election drama is over.
Not only persuasion but also threat was used in some constituencies to compel ordinary poor people to vote for a particular party or candidate. Groups of ruffians employed by the party went from house to house and told the members of the family “if you vote for our party, we will meet you during the day, but if you will not vote for us we will visit you during the night." Now why would anybody want to meet some body at night? One does not need too much imagination to know why.
No ideology or principle in forming government: if there was one goal that was visible immediately after election result was announced it was which party will join which other party in order to come to power. Parties which were considered ‘communal’ have suddenly become ‘non-communal’! The party manifestos issued by some of these parties before the election was not even referred to in this process of forming ruling alliance. The next point of contention will be which party will get how many ministerial berths. And within the parties, who will become ministers and who will remain just MLAs. This is the drama the general public is witnessing.
This is the functioning of ‘bourgeois representative democracy’. We have to await the arrival of real ‘peoples participatory democracy’.
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|